^ 

V 


^<l 

!     .# 

. 

! 

^ 

VO 

^ 

VO 

^ 

00 

H 

1 

1 

"^^^ 

ON 

^            f^ 

O 

♦  ^ 

m  00 

in  H 

00 

H      • 

in        (3 

^  s  i 

^   1   ^ 

o 

^  3  ^ 

^       ^ 

a:  b  J 

> 

Ph 

CM     fi     0» 

-ut^ 

ON     0 

^ 

ON     0    H 
CO   H   -H 

H    > 

{K|   -H  -H 

CQ    5    0 

'                Vf 

^ 

#~^ 

i 

• 

"^^'' 


3k 


^ 


CIVIL  GOVERNMENT; 


IXPOSITION  OF  ROMANS  XIII.  1—7, 


BY 


JAMES  M.VWILLSON,  A.M. 


philadelphia: 
William  s.  young,  173  race  street. 

1863. 


1^4 


ADVERTISEMENT, 


This  volume  contains  the  substance  of  Lectures  de* 
iivered  upon  Romans  xiii.  1-7,  in  the  course  of  a 
regular  exposition  of  this  Epistle,  and  is  published  in 
pursuance  of  the  following  resolution  adopted  at  a 
special  meeting  of  the  Cherry  Street  Reformed  Pros-- 
byterian  Congregation,  Philadelphia. 

•^  Resolved— Thai  Mr.  Willson  be  requested  to  furnish 
a  copy  of  said  Lectures  for  publication,  and  that  Messrs* 
Wm.  Cochran,  David  Smith,  and  Jolm  L.  Keys,  be 
a  committee  to  attend  to  said  publication.'^ 


CIVIL   GOVERNMENT. 


^xtfut. 


The  subject  of  civil  government  is,  in  all 
its  aspects,  of  no  little  importance.  It  oc- 
cupies a  large  share  of  men's  thoughts  in  all 
enlightened  countries,  and  awakens,  just  now, 
the  liveliest  concern.  This  is  not  strange ; 
for  its  influence  is  felt  in  every  department 
of  human  action.  It  has  to  do  with  the  peace, 
the  order,  the  material  prosperity  of  the  com- 
monwealth; with  the  rights  and  liberties  of 
the  citizens,  and  exercises  no  inconsiderable 
influence  upon  the  interests  of  morals  and  re- 
ligion. In  all  these  respects,  in  the  last  par- 
ticularly, the  institution  of  civil  government 
is  deserving  the  attention  of  the  Christian  and 
of  the  Christian  minister.  Moreover,  the  in- 
1 


'6  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

spired  writers  take  occasion,  not  unfrequent- 
ly,  to  state,  sometimes  summarily  in  the  doc- 
trinal form,  and  sometimes  in  narrative  and 
in  detail,  leading  principles  by  which  the  in- 
telligent and  faithful  may  be  directed  as  to 
the  part  which  they  are  to  take  in  setting  up, 
in  administering,  or  in  supporting  political 
constitutions.  Hence,  no  apology  is  neces- 
sary in  entering  upon  such  an  examination  as 
that  which  is  now  proposed.  The  topic  itself 
is  of  great  moment,  and  the  light  and  autho- 
rity of  God's  Word  are  before  us. 

Again:  these  researches  are  imperatively 
called  for,  inasmuch  as  the  particular  passage 
to  which  the  attention  of  the  reader  is  asked 
— Rom.  xiii.  1 — 7 — has  been  grievously  per- 
verted. One  class  of  expositors  endeavour  to 
derive  from  these  teachings  of  Paul  the  of- 
fensive principle  of  unresisting,  unquestion- 
ing subjection  to  civil  authority  of  whatever 
stamp.  Rulers,  say  they,  may  be  ungodly, 
tyrannical,  immoral, — they  may  use  their 
power  for  the  worst  ends, — they  may  subvert 
the  liberties,  and  take  away  the  rights  of 
their  subjects.     Still,  but  one  course  is  open; 


PREFACE.  T 

even  to  such  rulers  and  to  such  authority, 
there  must  be  yielded  at  least  a  "passive  obe- 
dience;" no  "resistance"  is  ever  lawful, 
though  made  by  the  entire  body  of  the  op- 
pressed, and  that  under  peril  of  eternal  dam- 
nation: for  "the  powers  that  be  are  ordained 
of  God;  and  he  that  resisteth  the  power  re- 
ceiveth  unto  himself  damnation." 

This  principle  was  a  very  prominent  topic 
among  the  controversies  that  arose  in  Eng- 
land after  the  restoration  of  Charles  II.,  in 
1660.  The  advocates  of  high  Episcopacy — 
particularly  the  Oxford  theologians — stated 
it  in  the  strongest  terms,  maintaining  the  di- 
vine right  of  the  restored  government  to  an 
unlimited  allegiance.  It  was  revived,  after 
the  Revolution  of  1688,  by  the  non-jurors 
and  their  friends,  who  urged  it  against  that 
settlement  of  affairs.  The  conflict  raged  long 
and  was  very  bitter ;  for  all,  whether  in  church 
or  state,  who  favoured  the  expulsion  of  James 
II.,  and  the  establishment  of  the  succession 
to  the  throne  in  the  house  of  Brunswick, — 
the  friends  of  civil  liberty, — were  equally  ear- 
nest in  maintaining  the  right  of  a  nation  to 


8  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

take  measures  for  the  prevention  of  tyranny 
and  of  an  arbitrary  power  over  the  rights  of 
the  subjects.  All  these,  including  such  men 
as  Burnet  and  Hoadly — while  they  vindicated 
monarchy  as  the  best  form  of  government,  in 
this  agreeing  with  their  opponents,  were  no 
less  vehement  in  asserting  and  also  in  proving 
that  the  apostle's  doctrine  implied  certain 
limitations ;  that  it  must  be  interpreted  so  as 
jiot  to  conflict  with  the  plain  dictates  of  rea^ 
son,  or  the  liberties  of  nations.  This  form 
of  the  controversy  regarding  this  celebrated 
passage,  has  passed  away.  Even  Oxford  found 
it  impossible  to  carry  out  its  own  doctrine ; 
and  hence  when  James  II.  attempted  to  lay 
violent  hands  upon  its  chartered  rights  and 
immunities,  Oxford  resisted:  it  eat  its  own 
words,  and  took  rank  with  the  most  decided 
adversaries  of  that  Popish  king  in  his  assaults 
upon  English  law  and  Protestantism.  While 
power  was  in  the  hands  of  a  court  professedly 
Protestant,  and  zealous  for  the  ecclesiastical 
supremacy  of  the  Church  of  England,  it  was  all 
well  enough ;  but  when  a  new  government  arose 
which  sought  to  transfer  all  the  posts  of  honour 


PREFACE.  9 

and  influence  in  church  and  state  into  po- 
pish hands,  these  conscientious  defenders  of  an 
absolute  divine  right  took  the  alarm,  and  re- 
fused to  be  bound  by  their  own  repeatedly  as- 
serted doctrines.  After  the  Revolution,  this 
principle  did  not  outlast  that  generation  which 
felt  itself  chagrined  at  the  toleration  of  dis- 
senters from  the  established  religion.  They 
had  fought  at  a  disadvantage,  and  lost  ground. 
A  new  generation  arose,  and  at  last,  as  a  to- 
pic of  controversy,  the  subject  was  dropped, 
and  hence,  whatever  private  views  may  have 
been  since  entertained  by  the  more  bigoted 
loyalists  and  ecclesiastics,  it  has  long  ceased 
to  figure  in  the  annals  of  literature. 

However,  even  the  "exploded"  doctrine  of 
^*  non-resistance  "  has  not  entirely  succumbed. 
It  has  found  a  place  in  the  commentaries  of 
Haldane  and  Chalmers,  and  still  lingers  in 
some  minds;  at  least,  in  the  form  of  doubts 
as  to  the  propriety  and  lawfulness  of  setting 
aside  institutions  and  men — by  violence,  if 
necessary, — that  have  proved  themselves  in- 
competent to  answer  the  ends  of  political  ar- 
rangements and  authority. 
1* 


10  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

There  is  another  class  of  expositors,  em- 
bracing a  large  proportion  of  the  more  mo- 
dern, and  some  of  the  ancient,  commentators ; 
who,  -while  they  admit  that  nations  maj  remo- 
del their  constitutions  so  as  to  suit  themselves, 
and  even  resort  to  violence  for  the  overthrow 
of  tyrannical  power — in  other  words,  they 
admit  the  right  of  revolution — still  hold  and 
teach,  as  the  doctrine  of  this  passage,  that 
so  long  as  a  government  exists,  whatever  be 
its  character,  it  is  entitled  to,  and  may  de- 
mand, in  the  name  of  God,  a  conscientious 
obedience  to  its  laws,  unless  they  conflict 
with  the  laws  of  God. 

This  is  a  view  highly  plausible  and  popular, 
and  yet  to  say  nothing,  at  present,  of  its  in- 
consistency, (for,  how  could  there  be  a  revo'- 
lutionary  movement,  unless  conscience  had 
previously  ceased  to  feel  any  obligation  to 
respect  and  honour  and  fear  the  existing  go- 
vernment?) it  will  appear  in  the  sequel  that 
it  gains  no  countenance  from  the  teachings 
of  Paul,  and  for  the  reason  that  the  passage 
makes  no  reference,  as  we  think  will  appear 
upon  strict  examination  of  its  terms,  to  any 


PREFACE.  11 

"power"  but  that  which  answers  in  some 
good  measure  the  ends  of  its  institution. 
Whatever  may  be  the  regard,  if  any,  due  to 
an  immoral  and  tyrannical,  and,  of  course, 
hurtful  government,  this  passage  makes  no 
reference  to  it.  It  teaches  one  set  of  truths, 
and  one  only, — the  nature,  functions,  and 
claims  of  a  good  government.  In  the  Ian* 
guage  of  Bishop  Hoadly:  "As  the  apostle's 
words  stand  at  present,  and  have  ever  stood, 
it  is  impossible  to  prove  that  he  had  in  view 
any  particular  magistrate  acting  against  the 
ends  of  his  institution ;"  and  again,  "All  that 
we  can  possibly  collect  from  his  (Paul's,)  in- 
junctions in  this  place  is  this,  that  it  is  the 
indispensable  duty  of  subjects  to  submit  them- 
selves to  such  governors  as  answer  the  good 
ends  of  their  institution.  There  is  nothing  to 
make  it  probable  that  Paul  had  any  governors 
particularly  in  his  eye,  who  were  a  terror  to 
good  works  and  not  to  evil ;  or  that  he  had  any 
other  design  in  this  place  but  to  press  sub- 
mission to  magistrates,  upon  those  who  ac- 
knowledged none  to  be  .due  in  point  of  con- 
science, from  the  end  of  their  institution,  and 


12  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

the  usefulness  of  their  office.  And  in  what- 
ever instances  submission  can  be  proved  to 
be  due  from  this  argument,  I  am  ready  to  ac- 
knowledge that  Paul  extended  it  to  all  such 
instances.  But  as  for  submission  in  other  in- 
stances, the  apostle's  reasoning  here  cannot 
defend  or  justify  it,  but  rather  implies  the 
contrary.  For  if  submission  be  a  duty  be- 
cause magistrates  are  carrying  forward  a 
good  work,  the  peace  and  happiness  of  hu- 
man society,  which  is  the  argument  Paul 
useth,  it  is  implied  in  this  that  resistance  is 
rather  a  duty  than  submission,  when  they 
manifestly  destroy  the  public  peace  and  hap- 
piness." 

We  are  aware  that  the  truth  of  these  as- 
sertions remains  to  be  proved:  their  truth 
will  appear  in  the  analysis  of  the  passage, 
but  we  would  now  state  it  distinctly  and  em- 
phatically, for  it  is  the  key  to  the  right  un- 
derstanding of  this,  and  parallel  passages. 
Keeping  this  in  mind,  the  scope  and  bearing 
of  Paul's  doctrine  on  civil  government  and 

*  Hoadly's  Submission  to  the  Powers  that  be;  pages 
49,  22,  60. 


PREFACE.  13 

^submission  to  authority,  is  as  clear  as  a  sun- 
beam. He  gives  no  countenance  to  any  sla- 
vish doctrine — to  any  claim  of  divine  right 
to  do  wrong — to  any  principle  that  would  tie 
up  our  hands,  or  in  the  least  interfere  with 
the  right  of  the  Christian  citizen  to  "prove," 
by  moral  and  scripture  rules,  as  well  as  by 
the  laws  of  self-preservation,  any  and  all  in- 
stitutions and  laws.  In  what  light  we  are  to 
regard  tyrannical  and  ungodly  powers,  we 
may  ascertain  elsewhere,  but  cannot  here,  ex- 
cept, and  the  exception  is  important,  that  in- 
asmuch as  Paul  gives  us  the  character  of  go- 
vernment, as  Gfod  approves  it,  and  then  en- 
joins subjection,  we  can  pretty  directly  infer 
that  in  case  a  government  does  not  possess, 
at  least,  a  due  measure  of  the  requisite  quali- 
fications, the  command  to  obey  cannot  apply 
to  it. 

A  greater  interest  is,  moreover,  to  be  at- 
tached to  such  investigations  as  we  propose? 
from  the  fact  that  the  infidels  of  our  times 
make  use  of  this  passage  to  serve  their  own 
purposes.  We  live  in  an  age  and  country  of 
liberal  ideas  regarding  government — an  age 


14  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

when  the  rights  of  the  people  are  watched 
with  the  utmost  sagacity  and  vigilance. — 
Popular  rights  are  matters  taken  for  granted, 
and  any  thing  that  runs  counter  to  them  is 
at  once  rejected.  Infidelity  attempts  to  turn 
this  feeling  in  behalf  of  liberty  into  its  own 
channel — to  rouse  it  against  the  Bible,  as  if 
it  favoured  absolute  and  irresponsible  power; 
and  they  avail  themselves,  and  with  no  little 
success,  of  the  mistaken  exposition  of  the 
very  passage  before  us.  The  expositors  to 
•whom  we  have  referred  intend  to  strengthen 
the  arm  of  any  and  all  civil  authority — these 
interpretations  the  infidel  school  use  for 
the  overthrow  of  the  authority  of  the  Bible. 
Both  are  met  and  foiled  by  one  process — sim- 
ply by  a  just  analysis  of  the  passage  itself. 

This  we  now  proceed  to  attempt,  hoping 
to  demonstrate,  on  the  one  hand,  that  a  good 
government  finds  here  both  a  guide  and  a 
pillar — and  on  the  other,  that  a  bad  govern- 
ment finds  not  the  faintest  shadow  of  counte- 
nance, but  is  inferentially,  but  not  the  less 
effectually,  condemned. 


EXPOSITION  OF  ROMANS  XIII.  1—7. 


"Let  every  soul  be  subject  iinto  the  higher  powers.--' 
For  there  is  no  power  but  of  God ;  the  powers  that  be  are 
ordained  of  God.  Whosoever  therefore  resisteth  the  power, 
resisteth  the  ordinance  of  God ;  and  they  that  resist  shall 
receive  to  themselves  damnation.  For  rulers  are  not  a 
terror  to  good  works,  but  to  the  evil.  Wilt  thou  then 
not  be  afraid  of  the  power?  Do  that  which  is  good, 
and  thou  shalt  have  praise  of  the  same.  For  he  is  the 
minister  of  God  to  thee  for  good.  But  if  thou  do  that 
which  is  evil,  be  afraid,  for  he  beareth  not  the  sword 
in  vain :  for  he  is  the  minister  of  God ;  a  revenger,  to  ex- 
ecute wrath  upon  him  that  doeth  evil.  Wherefore  ye 
must  needs  be  subject,  not  only  for  wrath,  but  also  for 
conscience  sake.  For  for  this  cause  pay  ye  tribute  also ; 
for  they  are  God's  ministers,  attending  continually  upon 
this  very  thing.  Render,  therefore,  to  all  their  dues: 
tribute  to  whom  tribute  is  due—^custom  to  whom  eustoni 
— fear  to  whom  fear^^honour  to  whom  honour." 

This  passage  will  be  found,  upon  careful  analysis, 
to  embrace  tlie  following  topics : 

I.  The  duty  in  general  of  obedience  to  civil  au- 
thority: V.  1» 


16  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

II.  Gleneral  considerations  enforcing  this  obedi- 
ence: V.  1  and  2, 

III.  The  design  of  the  appointment  of  rulers,  or 
of  the  institution  of  government :  v.  3. 

lY.  The  application  of  these  principles  to  the 
case  both  of  good  and  bad  citizens :  v.  3,  4. 

Y.  The  principle  of  obedience  to  civil  rule :  v,  5, 
YI.    A  more  specific  statement  of  the  duties 
owing  to  civil  government,  as  previously  described; 
V.  6,  7. 

SECTION  I. 

THE  DUTYj  IN  GENERAL,  OF  OBEDIENCE  TO  CIVIL  AUTHO- 
RITY. 

^^Let  every  soul  be  subject  to  the  higherpowers." 
verse  1. 

1.  Civil  governments  are  called  ^^ Powers.^^  The 
term  here  used  (^e^ova-icc)  is  employed  to  denote  any 
species  of  authority — paternal,  ecclesiastical,  ma- 
gisterial. That  in  this  instance  it  means  civil  rule, 
is  abundantly  clear  from  the  whole  tenor  of  the  pas- 
sage. It  is  important,  however,  to  remark  that  it 
designates  civil  government,  not  as  an  institution 
endued  with  ability  to  execute  its  will — for  this 
another  term  (^^vvuf>(,ti)  would  have  been  more  ap- 
propriate— ^but  as  invested  with  the  right  to  enact 
and  administer  law.  ^^By  what  authority,"  (f  l^f- 
(Ticc)  say  the  scribes  to  our  Lord,  ^^doest  thou  these 


CIVIL  GOVERNMENT.  17 

things?" — ^^who  hath  given  thee  this  authority?" 
(Matt.  xxi.  23.*) 

2.  They  are  called  ^^ Higher  Powers.'^  The  word 
(•J7rfpe;^<9yc-flt;5)  here  rendered  "higher,"  properly 
signifies  prominence,  or  eminence,  and  hence  it 
comes  to  mean  "excellent,"  or  "excelling,"  and  must 
be  translated  by  these  or  equivalent  expressions  in 
a  number  of  passages  in  the  New  Testament.  "Let 
each  esteem  other  better  (y;rf^e;t;avr««$)  than 
themselves,"  (Phil.  ii.  3.)  "And  the  peace  of 
Grod,  which  passeth  (^vTrepexovTo)  all  understand- 
ing," (Phil.  iv.  7.)  "For  the  excellency  (^^icc  t* 
v-repe^ov')  of  the  knowledge  of  Christ  Jesus  my 
Lord,"  (Phil.  iii.  8.)  In  fact,  the  passage  now 
before,  us,  and  Pet.  ii.  13,  a  parallel  passage,  are  the 
only  instances  in  which  our  translators  have  fur- 
nished a  difierent  rendering.  Hence,  some  exposi- 
tors have  been  disposed  to  lay  no  little  stress  upon 
this  epithet,  as  distinctly  defining  the  character  of 
the'powers  here  intended,  and  as  limiting  to  such  the 
subjection  here  enjoined,  the  "excelling  powers;" 
that  is,  powers  possessing  a  due  measure  of  the 
qualifications  requisite  to  the  rightful  exercise  of 
the  power  of  civil  rule. 

That  such  is  the  fact — that  the  duty  of  subjec- 
tion to  civil  rule  is  not  absolutely  unlimited — that 

*  See  Appendix  A. 

2 


18  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

it  must  be  determined  Iby  other  and  higher  consi- 
derations than  the  mere  fact  that  it  exists  and 
brandishes  "the  sword/'  is  a  most  important  truth 
— a  truth  no  where  taught  more  clearly,  as  we  shall 
find,  than  in  the  passage  before  us.     Still  we  are 
not  disposed  to  insist  upon  any  different  rendering. 
We  neither   deny  nor  affirm.     To  elicit  the  true 
meaning  and  import  of  the  passage  does  not  require 
the  aid  of  minute,  and,  after  all,  doubtful  criticism.* 
Civil  rule  is  a  "higher"  power — it  is  invested  with 
an  eminent  dignity.     It  spreads  its  aegis — when 
properly  constituted  and  administered — over  the 
whole  commonwealth,  with  all  its  varied  interests, 
and  claims  an  unopposed  supremacy.     There  is  an 
inherent  majesty  in  lawful  governmental  power  cal- 
culated and  designed  to  impress  subjects  and  citi- 
zens of  every  class  and  character  with  a  salutary 
awe.     And    whether  the  attributes   of   inherent 
moral  excellency  be  expressed  in  the  designation 
here  given  or  not,  it  may  be  readily  inferred,  for 
"power,"  without  moral  character,  is  a  monster  in- 
deed. 

It  is,  however,  government  and  not  the  particu- 
lar magistrates  by  whom  authority  is  exercised,  to 
which  Paul  here  refers.     The  distinction  is  impor- 
tant.    " Rulers"  are  mentioned  for  the  first  time  in 
*  See  Appendix  B. 


CrVIL  GOVERNMENT.  19 

V.  3.     He  now  treats  of  the  institution  of  civil  rule. 
The  "powers" — the  "higher''  powers, — Govern- 
ment in  the  abstract — the  institution  of  civil  rule. 
3.   Subjection  is  enjoined  to  civil  government;  v. 
1:    "B3  subject:"  that  is,  voluntarily,  freely,  and 
cheerfully  rendering  allegiance  and  homage,  and 
yielding  a  uniform  and  conscientious  obedience  to 
the  wholesome  laws  enacted  by  the  "higher  pow- 
ers."   In  other  words,  what  is  here  meant  is  some- 
thing far  different  from  an  unresisting  submission 
to  what  cannot  be  helped,  as  when  the  unarmed 
traveller  submits  to  be  despoiled  by  the  highway 
robber.     This  kind  of  submission  is,  indeed,  often 
called  for.     The  slave  must,  of  necessity,  do  the 
bidding  of  his  master.     The  power  is  unjust.     It 
may  be  tyrannically  exercised.     It  is,  in  its  very 
nature,  despotic.     But  the  victim  of  wrong  has,  for 
the  time,  no  alternative.     By  obedience  alone  can 
he  secure  exemption  from  greater  suffering.     So 
the  unhappy  subject  of  arbitrary  civil  rule.     He  is 
beneath  the  iron  heel  of  the  despot.    He  must  obey. 
But  it  is  a  forced  obedience,  wrung  from  him  by 
the  irresistible  might  of  the  tyrant's  sceptre.     So, 
also,  the  Christian  may  be  compelled  to  yield  a  kind 
of  submission  to  overwhelming  power.     He  is  in 
its  hand.     The  sword  is  ready  to  enforce  the  man- 
dates of  unholy  authority.     The  slave,  and  the  sub- 


20  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

ject  of  despotic  civil  rule,  alike  submit;  but  both 
for  tbe  same  reason — the  impossibility  of  escape,  or 
of  successful  resistance. 

To  nothing  of  all  this  does  the  inspired  apostle 
here  refer.  He  employs  a  term  (^v7roru<rcre<r6tu') 
that  denotes  an  orderly  and  due  submission — a 
genuine  and  hearty  subjection;  and  to  fix  the  mean- 
ing of  the  injunction  beyond  dispute,  he  defines  it 
more  fully,  afterwards,  inverses  5  and  7:  '^Where- 
fore ye  must  needs  be  subject,  not  only  for  wrath, 
but  also  for  conscience'  sake :  fear  to  whom  fear — 
honour  to  whom  honour.'^  In  short,  whatever  may 
be  the  duty  of  the  oppressed,  and  whatever  his 
rights,  Paul  does  not  here  consider  either.  He 
deals  with  but  one  topic:  the  duty  of  subjection  to 
civil  government — civil  government  as  he  after- 
wards describes  it,  with  its  duties,  its  character  and 
its  claims.  To  such  a  government  there  is  due,  not 
mere  obedience,  but  an  obedience  hearty  and 
prompt;  an  obedience  importing  an  acknowledg- 
ment of  its  being  and  authority — an  obedience  ori- 
ginating in  an  intelligent  perception  and  apprecia- 
tion of  its  character,  design,  and  happy  fruits.  But 
even  this,  we  may  safely  say,  is  not  inconsiderate 
or  unlimited,  for  it  is  an  obedience  limited,  after  all, 
by  the  paramount  claims  of  the  law  of  God.  For 
surely  none  but  an  atheist  can  deliberately  affirm 


CIVIL  GOVERNMENT.  21 

that  even  tlie  law  of  the  land  can  set  aside,  weaken 
or  nullify  the  authority  of  the  law  of  Grod.  To  the 
hest  government,  obedience  can  be  yielded  only  in 
things  lawful;  for  there  is  a  '^higher  law"  to  which 
rulers  and  subjects  are  alike  amenable.  ^'The 
heavens  do  rule.'^  There  is  a  God  above  us,  and 
'Ho  Him  every  knee  shall  bow,  and  every  tongue 
shall  confess  that  Jesus  Christ  is  Lord,  to  the  glory 
of  God  the  Father,'^  (Phil.  ii.  10,  11.)  And, 
surely,  if  obedience  to  the  best  government  is  thus 
limited,  it  need  hardly  be  added,  that  submission 
to  an  unholy  power  does  not  go  beyond  this.  This 
also  is  limited  by  the  law  of  God.  It  can  only  be 
yielded  when  this  can  be  done  without  sin.  In 
every  other  case,  the  subject — the  slave  even — 
should  imitate  the  noble  example  of  Daniel,  and  of 
myriads  of  the  faithful  before  and  since,  and  suffer 
rather  than  sin. 

To  return :  the  duty  here  inculcated  is  that  of  a 
hearty  recognition  of  a  rightful  civil  authority,  to- 
gether with  an  active  support  of  its  claims,  and  a 
personal  and  respectful  obedience  to  its  lawful 
enactments. 

4.  This  injunction  lies  upon  every  citizen.  "Let 
every  soul  be  subject,"  &c.*  (v.  1.)     There  is  no 

*  We  might,  perhaps,  have  adduced  this  clause — the 

2* 


22  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

exception.  The  rich  and  the  poor,  the  young  and  the 
old,  the  Christian  and  the  infidel,  the  minister  of 
Christ  as  well  as  the  private  member  of  the  church 
must  be  subject.  In  this  lies  much  of  the  emphasis 
of  the  apostle's  language;  for  it  is  clearly  intended  to 
rebuke  the  notion,  early  entertained,  and  that  has 
still  found  a  place  among  the  professed  followers  of 
Christ,  that  it  is  unworthy  of  a  Christian  to  be 
subject  to  civil  rule;  that  having  one  master,  even 
Christ,  obedience  is  due,  in  no  sense,  not  even  with 
suitable  limitations,  to  any  other  authority;  and, 
also,  to  confute,  before-hand,  the  arrogance  of  the 
popish  priesthood,  who  claim,  as  all  know,  exemp- 
tion from  civil  control.  Equally  opposed  to  both 
these  is  the  explicit  declaration  of  Paul,  ^'Let  every 
soul  be  subject  to  the  higher  powers." 

Nor  can  this  be  wrested  to  the  establishment  of 
any  authority  on  the  part  of  the  civil  magistrate 
over  the  church  of  Christ.  The  church  is  an  in- 
dependent society.  Her  constitution,  her  doctrines, 
her  laws,  her  administration,  all  are  from  Christ. 
To  him  alone  is  she  subject.  She  exists,  indeed, 
among  and  in  the  kingdoms  of  the  world,  but  owns 

term  "soul"  particularly — as  an  argument  confirming 
our  interpretation  of  the  command,  "be  subject."  It  is 
not  outward  submission  merely,  but  a  subjection  in  "wMch 
the  "soul"  goes  along  -with  the  external  act. 


CIVIL  GOVERNMENT.  23 

no  allegiance  to  any  other  Head  than  to  Christ.  To 
claim  supremacy  over  her  is  a  presumptuous  and 
unwarranted  usurpation;  God  alone  is  Lord  of  the 
conscience. 

INFERENCES. 

1.  Christians  should  endeavour  to  understand, 
and  should  take  suitable  interest  in  the  subject  of 
civil  government.  It  is  neither  remote  from  them, 
nor  too  unholy  to  occupy  their  attention.  From 
the  mere  contests  of  faction  they  may,  indeed, 
stand  aloof;  but,  surely,  that  which  attracted  the 
attention  of  an  inspired  apostle  is  not  beneath  the 
study  of  the  most  spiritually-minded  of  the  fol 
lowers  of  Christ.  He  should  study  the  subject 
moreover;  for  without  this,  he  cannot  with  becoming 
high  intelligence  perform  his  own  duty  respecting  it 

2.  The  Christian  minister  may  and  ought  to  pre 
sent  the  doctrine  of  the  word  of  God,  on  this,  as 
on  other  subjects  of  which  the  inspired  writers  treat 
The  time  was,  when  it  would  have  been  necessary 
to  argue  elaborately  in  defence  of  this  statement 
It  is  not  necessary  now.  The  pulpit  has  been  com 
pelled  to  enter  this  field— long  almost  abandoned 
An  age  of,  at  least,  attempted  social  reformation 
has  driven  every  party  in  turn  to  seek  the  powerful 
aid  of  the  Christian  ministry,  and  while  we  cannot 


24  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

in  many  instances  find  much  to  commend  in  the 
manner  in  whicli  the  subject  has  been  presented,  it 
is  still  so  far  well,  that  portions  of  the  Word  of 
G-od  which  exhibit  the  character,  functions,  and 
claims  of  civil  power,  are  no  longer  regarded  as 
forbidden  ground.  Still,  there  is  need  of  wisdom. 
In  such  discussions,  the  ambassador  of  Christ  should 
keep  close  to  the  footsteps  of  his  Master  and  of  his 
inspired  followers,  and  rising  above  the  transient 
conflicts  and  unworthy  behests  of  party,  should 
essay  to  exhibit  and  illustrate  the  entire  subject  of 
governmental  arrangements  and  polity,  in  a  manner 
becoming  an  exalted  moral  institution — so  as  to 
bring  a  revenue  of  glory  to  Christ  the  Supreme 
Lawgiver. 

SECTION  II. 

GENERAL  CONSIDERATIONS  ENFORCING  THE  DUTY  OF  OBE- 
DIENCE TO  CIVIL  RULE. 

'Tor  there  is  no  power  but  of  God:  the  powers  that 
be  are  ordained  of  God.  Whosoever,  therefore,  resisteth 
the  power,  resisteth  the  ordinance  of  God ;  and  they 
that  resist  shall  receive  to  themselves  damnation." 
Verses  1,  2. 

Having  stated  the  duty,  the  apostle  now  pro- 
ceeds to  show  the  grounds  on  which  it  rests,  insist- 
ing upon  two  classes  of  arguments,  and 


CIVIL  GOVERNMENT.  25 

1.  They  derive  their  poioer.  from  God,  or  in 
other  words,  government  is  a  divine  institution, 
originating  in,  and,  of  course,  sanctioned  by  the 
will  of  God,  For  (1.)  ^^  There  is  no  power  but  of 
God."  This  is  true,  whatever  sense  we  attach  to 
the  word  "power/'  All  physical  power — all  exe- 
cutive energy,  in  every  department  of  creation,  is 
from  God.  "In  Him  we  live,  and  move,  and  have 
our  being."  (Acts  xvii.  28.)  In  this  sense  the 
power  of  evil  beasts  and  even  of  the  devil,  is  from 
God.  "By  Him  all  things  consist,"  (Col.  i.  17.) 
Again,  if  we  understand  by  "power,"  the  posses- 
sion of  the  reins  of  government,  it  is,  certainly, 
through  Him  that  kings  are  permitted  to  occupy 
their  thrones  and  that,  whatever  the  steps  by  which 
they  may  have  succeeded  to  the  seat  of  authority. 
Pharaoh  was  "raised  up"  in  the  course  of  that  pro- 
vidence which  controls  all  the  affairs  of  men.  God 
"gave  the  kingdom"  to  Jeroboam.  The  same 
hand  "raised  up"  Cyrus,  and  our  Lord  expressly 
declares  to  Pilate,  the  unholy  Roman  governor, 
"Thou  couldest  have  no  power  at  all  against  me, 
except  it  were  given  to  thee  from  above,"  (John 
xix.  11.)  Even  the  devil  has  "power,"  in  this 
sense,  from  God.  Does  Paul  mean  no  more  than 
this  ?  Assuredly  he  means  something  far  different. 
This  clause  assigns  a  reason  for  that  hearty  subjec- 


26  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

tion  which  the  apostle  had  just  enjoined.  But, 
surely,  the  mere  fact  that  one  possesses  ^^power/^ 
can  be  no  reason  why  his  claims  should  be  acknow- 
ledged, and  his  laws  conscientiously  obeyed.  If 
so,  the  slave— ay,  the  slave  who  has  been  stolen 
from  his  own  land  and  ignominiously  held  as  a 
chattel — would  be  required  to  admit,  as  from  Grod, 
the  validity  of  his  master's  claims.  To  throw  off 
his  chains,  and  make  his  way  to  his  native  home  as 
a  freeman,  would  be  rebellion  against  God.  No 
doctrine  could  be  more  agreeable  than  this  to 
tyrants,  and  to  all  the  panders  to  unholy  power; 
for,  if  this  be  Paul's  meaning,  there  is  no  despot, 
no  usurper,  no  bloody  conqueror,  but  could  plead 
the  divine  sanction,  and,  more  than  this,  the  devil 
himself  could  lay  the  teachings  of  Paul  under  con- 
tribution to  enforce  his  pre-eminently  unholy  au- 
thority. An  interpretation  which  leads  to  such 
monstrous  conclusions — that  would  bind  the  na- 
tions to  the  footstool  of  power  with  iron  chains, 
and  utterly  crush  every  free  aspiration — that  would 
invest  with  the  sanctions  of  the  divine  name  the 
most  flagrant  usurpation  and  the  most  unrelenting 
despotism — stands  self-condemned. 

But  we  go  further.  Providence  is  not  a  rule  of 
action.  Sin  and  evil  of  all  kinds  exist  in  the  course 
of  the  same  providential  administration,  as  that 


CIVIL  aOVERNMENT.  27 

wHicli  furnishes  a  place  for  governments  which 
contemn  God  and  oppress  mankind.  And  yet  who 
claims  for  sin  a  divine  sanction?  who  denies  to  the 
suffering  the  right  to  rid  themselves  of  their  trials? 
Carry  out  this  interpretation,  and  you  furnish  the 
bloody  government  of  the  Papal  states  an  impreg- 
nable defence  against  the  efforts  of  the  liberators 
of  Italy. 

The  truth  is,  the  apostle  has  no  reference  here 
at  all  to  any  thing  but  the  institution  of  govern- 
ment;* and  designs  to  assert,  and  does  assert,  that 
there  is  no  authority  properly  exercised  over  men, 
but  that  which  God  has  established.  This  is  true 
in  the  largest  sense :  for  man  is  God's  creature  and 
subject,  and  he  who  sets  up  claims  to  dominion  over 
him  must  be  prepared  to  show  that  he  exercises  an 
authority  of  that'  sort  and  of  that  character  which 
bears  the  stamp  and  sanction  of  divine  institution. 
Had  Paul,  indeed,  said  no  more,  it  might  have  been 
argued,  with  greater  plausibility,  that  he  designed 
in  this  passage  to  give  the  tyrants  of  the  earth, 
what  they  have  always  claimed,  the  sanction  of  the 

*  ^^ Power  is  to  be  distinguished  from  persons;  for 
Paul  loved  polity  and  power;  but  Caligula  and  Nero  he 
execrated  as  monsters  in  nature,  instruments  of  the  devil, 
and  pests  of  the  human  race,"  Lectures  on  Romans  by 
Andrew  MelvUle,  Edin.,  1850,  p.  487. 


28  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

Most  Higli  in  their  course  of  monstrous  iniquity. 
Even  then,  however,  we  would  have  endeavoured, 
and  we  think  successfully,  to  vindicate  the  word  of 
(xod  against  so  abhorrent  a  conclusion.  But  Paul 
did  not  stop  with  these  general  assertions.  He  pro- 
ceeds, as  will  presently  appear,  to  define,  with  great 
distinctness  and  brevity,  his  own  meaning :  to  de- 
signate the  sort  of  ^ ^ power '^  to  which  he  alludes: 
not  any  and  every  existing  government,  but  that 
which  answers  the  end  of  its  institution.  In  short, 
the  design  of  this  clause:  "There  is  no  power  but 
of  Grod,'^  is  merely  to  assert  the  general  principle 
that  subjection  is  due  to  civil  government,  inas- 
much as  government  is  a  divine  institution.  This 
appears  more  distinctly  from  what  follows. 

(2.)  "The  powers  that  be  are  ordained  of  Grod." 
The  prime  fallacy  of  many  commentaries  on  this 
entire  passage  consists  in  taking  for  granted  that 
this  phrase — this  celebrated  phrase — "the  powers 
that  be" — means  all  and  any  existing  governments. 
This  cannot  be.  The  considerations  already  ad- 
vanced, in  setting  aside  a  similar  interpretation  of 
the  preceding  clause,  forbid  it.  Nor  are  there  want- 
ing others,  equally  conclusive.  Of  Israel  it  is  said, 
referring  to  the  establishment  of  an  independent 
government  by  the  ten  tribes  under  Jeroboam, 
"They  have  set  up  kings,  but  not  by  me;   they 


OrVIL  GOVERNMENT.  29 

have  made  princes,  and  I  knew  (approved)  it  not/' 
(Hos.  viii.  4.)  And  the  prophet  Daniel,  and  after- 
wards the  apostle  John,  expressly  and  frequently 
denominate  the  Koman  Empire  a  "  beast."  The 
former,  a  ^^  beast,  dreadful  and  terrible,  and  strong 
exceedingly;  and  it  had  great  iron  teeth:  it  de- 
voured and  brake  in  pieces,  and  stamped  the  resi- 
due with  the  feet  of  it,"  (Dan.  vii.  11.)  The  lat- 
ter, a  ^^  beast  having  seven  heads  and  ten  horns, 
and  on  its  horns  ten  crowns,  and  on  its  heads  the 
name  of  blasphemy,"  (E,ev.  xvii.  1.)  Surely 
such  a  description  was  never  given  of  a  government 
that  could  lay  any  solid  claim  to  be  ^^  ordained  of 
Grod;"  at  least,  in  any  other  sense  than  the  pes- 
tilence is  God's  ordinance,  existing  in  his  provi- 
dence, but  to  be  shunned  and  banished  as  soon  as 
possible.*     And,   in   fact,   for   this   end,  among 

*  "So  are  fevers,  plagues,  fires,  inundations,  tempests, 
and  the  like.  And  yet  Almighty  God  not  only  permits, 
but  requires  us  to  use  all  prudent  methods  of  resisting 
and  stopping  their  fury,  but  is  far  from  expecting  that  we 
should  lie  down,  and  do  nothing  to  save  ourselves  from 
perishing  in  such  calamities.  So  likewise  are  robbers 
and  cut-throats  God's  judgments,  but  this  doth  not  prove 
that  you  must  submit  yourselves  and  families  to  be  ruined 
at  their  pleasure.  So  again  are  inferior  magistrates,  if 
they  make  use  of  their  power  to  fall  with  violence  upon 
their  neighbours,  and  attempt  their  lives,  or  the  ruin  of 

3 


30  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

otherS;  the  gospel  is  sent  into  the  world.  It  is  the 
"stone  cut  out  of  the  mountain  without  hands/^ 
which  is  to  "smite  the  great  image  (Dan.  ii.)  and 
break  it  in  pieces.^'  One  ordinance  of  God,  smiting, 
and  breaking  in  pieces,  another!  The  term  " pow- 
ers'' here  denote,  as  before,  the  institution  of  civil 
rule.  This,  with  all  other  kinds  of  power  that  may 
be  lawfully  exercised  among  men,  is  "ordained  of 
God.''  In  other  words,  the  Most  High  has  made 
provision  for  the  exercise  of  civil  authority.  He 
has  not  left  mankind  to  be  controlled  by  no  other 
government  than  that  of  parents  over  their  children, 

their  families ;  and  yet  they  may  be  resisted,  and  their 
illegal  violence  repelled  by  violence.  And  so,  lastly,  are 
foreign  enemies  and  invaders,  always  reckoned  amongst 
God's  judgments,  and  amongst  the  most  remarkable  of 
them ;  and  yet  there  is  no  necessity,  I  hope,  from  hence, 
of  tamely  submitting  ourselves  to  them :  and  no  argument 
from  hence,  against  the  lawfulness  or  honourableness  of 
resisting  them.  Either,  therefore,  let  it  be  shown,  that 
this  objection  holds  good  in  other  of  God's  judgments; 
or,  that  there  is  something  peculiar  in  this  to  exempt  it 
from  the  common  rule ;  or  let  it  be  acknowledged  that 
it  signifies  nothing  in  the  present  case."  Hoadhjs  Sub- 
mission to  the  Powers  that  be.  London,  1718,  p.  85. 
Hoadly  presents  this,  it  will  be  seen,  as  an  answer  to  the 
objection,  that  bad  governments  are  to  be  submitted  to, 
and  not  thrown  off,  because  they  are  judgments  of  God. 
It  comes  in  as  well  here. 


CIVIL  GOVERNMENT.  31 

of  masters  over  their  servants,  of  church  rulers  over 
private  Christians.  He  has,  also,  provided  for  the 
setting  up  and  administering  of  another  kind  of 
power,  having  its  own  peculiar  ends,  its  rules,  its 
limits,  and  its  administrators — the  power  of  civil 
government.  God  has  willed  the  existence  of  a  na- 
tional organization  and  polity;  and,  in  so  doing, 
has  fixed  its  ends,  which  it  must  subserve;  has 
given  it  a  supreme  law,  which  it  must  observe;  has 
bound  it  by  limits  which  it  may  not  pass  over.  In 
short,  God  has  "ordained^'*  civil  government  as 
Christ  has  ordained  the  ministry  of  reconciliation, 
not  by  merely  willing  its  existence,  but  by  pre- 
scribing its  duties,  its  functions,  its  ends,  and  its 
limitations.  ] 

No  other  meaning  can  be  affixed  to  the  language 
of  the  apostle,  consistently  with  due  reverence  for 
Him  who  is  the  Holy  One  and  the  Just,  the  right- 
ful and  beneficent  moral  Governor.  Can  it  be,  for 
a  moment,  believed,  that  God  has  made  man  a 
social  being — placed  him  in  society,  and  thus  ne- 
cessitated, by  the  very  laws  of  the  human  constitu- 
tion, the  establishment  of  civil  rule,  and  that  he 
has,  after  all,  set  no  bounds  to  the  authority,  no 

•^  The  marginal  translation,  "ordered,"  is  rather  better 
than  that  of  the  text. 


32  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

hedge  about  the  claims  of  civil  rulers?  That,  after 
all,  He  has  left  this  whole  matter  to  be  lawfully 
managed,  not  by  law,  even  His  law,  not  by  rule, 
but  merely  according  to  human  caprice,  or,  what  is 
far  worse,  human  ambition,  self-seeking,  pride,  and 
violence?  And,  then,  as  the  issue  of  the  matter, 
that  in  case  a  government  exist,  whatever  the  ends 
it  aims  at,  whatever  the  principles  that  guide  its 
administration,  whether  it  be  just  or  unjust.  God- 
fearing or  infidel,  liberal  or  despotic,  it  exists,  and 
He  acknowledges  it  as  '^ordained''  by  Him,  and  as 
entitled  to  the  regard,  homage  and  obedience  of  its 
subjects?  This  cannot  be.  Grod  is  not  so  indif- 
ferent to  His  own  glory,  or  to  the  welfare  of  man, 
and  particularly  of  the  church.  He  never  intended, 
we  may  assert,  with  entire  confidence,  to  sign,  if  we 
may  so  speak,  a  blank,  and  then  leave  man  to  fill 
it  up  according  to  his  pleasure.  Every  attribute  of 
God  forbids  this.  Paul  teaches  no  such  doctrine. 
The  terms  employed  by  the  apostle,  and  the  con- 
nexion of  the  clauses,  accord  precisely  with  these 
views.  He  first  asserts  ^' power  is  not,  except  from 
God : "  *  God  alone  is  the  source  of  legitimate  au- 
thority. He  is  sovereign.  Man  is  His.  Power, 
not  derived  from  God,  is  ever  illegitimate.     It  is 

*  Ou  5-ag  sarty  t^ovtri*  tt/jc»  ano  Qeov. 


CIVIL  aOVERNMENT.  30 

mere  usurpation;  as^  for  example^  the  Pope's  claim 
to  reign  in  the  church,  and  over  the  nations.  The 
apostle  then  adds,  in  vindication  of  civil  govern- 
ment, "the  powers  that  be" — governmental  insti- 
tutions; "are  arranged  under  Grod/'*  or  if  this  be 
preferred,  "by  Grod/'  There  is  such  a  "power'' 
as  that  of  civil  rule.  It  is  among  the  kinds  of  au- 
thority for  which  the  Most  High  has  made  provi- 
sion, and  to  which  he  has  assigned  the  requisite 
laws  and  functions. 

But  we  rest  our  interpretation  upon  no  mere  ver- 
bal criticism.  Grod  is  the  only  source  of  power. 
And  Grod  has  in  the  sense  in  which  we  have  ex- 
plained the  term,  "ordained"  civil  government. 
He  is  the  source  of  power,  that  power  of  which 
Paul   speaks,  not  as   He   endows   with   physical 

*  Ae  ^8  ouo-a/  s^ovciaiy  oto  tov  Qiou  rtTayfittvai  itTiv. 
We  here  quote  from  the  commentary  of  Andrew  Melville. 
He  says,  *'The  third  argument  is  taken  from  the  order 
divinely  constituted  under  God — for  the  glory  of  God ;  for 
so  I  interpret  vtio  tov,  &c.  Not  so  much  '  from  God,'  whieh 
has  been  already  said,  as  '  powers  are  arranged  under 
God.'  Which  with  the  article  rctg  ovag  he  calls  t^ov(TiAq 
— as  if  he  had  said  lag  ovra?,  &c.,  'which  are  truly 
powers'  and  deserve  the  name.  Wlience,  an  impious  and 
unjust  tyranny,  which  is  not  of  God,  as  such,  nor  accords 
with  the  divine  order,  he  excludes,  as  illegitimate,  from 
this  legitimate  obedience."  Comment,  p.  497. 
3* 


34  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

strength,  or  even  as  He  opens  the  way,  in  his  pro- 
vidence, for  its  successful  employment  in  subju- 
gating mankind;  but  as  he  has  authorized  the  ex- 
ercise of  that  particular  kind  of  authority;  of 
course, .  putting  upon  it,  when  measurably  con- 
formed to  his  institution,  the  impress  of  His  own 
dignity,  and  the  sanction  of  His  law.* 

Is  it  inquired,  where  this  institution  is  found? 
The  reply  has  been,  in  part,  anticipated.  In  the 
constitution  of  man,  and  in  the  principles  of  piety, 
of  equity,  of  beneficence,  originally  implanted  in 
the  human  heart,  but  now,  much  more  clearly, 
in  the  written  Scriptures,  which  abound  with  in- 
struction, addressed  to  rulers  and  people,  and  fur- 
nishing all  the  light  mankind  need  for  the  organi- 
zation and  administration  of  the  most  salutary  po- 
litical regimen.  The  passage  before  us  is  an  ex- 
ample. It  is  proper,  however,  to  add,  that  instruc- 
tion is  given  in  the  word  of  Grod,  not  so  much  in 
regard  to  the  particular  form  which  the  government 
should  assume,  as  in  reference  to  the  ends  it  should 
seek,  the  principles  that  should  guide  the  adminis- 
tration, and  the  character  of  those  into  whose  hands 
national  affairs  should  be  committed. 

*  "And  this  may  serve  to  explain  yet  farther  in  what 
sense  these  higher  powers  are  from  God;  viz.,  as  they 


CIVIL  GOVERNMENT.  35 

This  is  Paul's  first  argument  enforcing  the  duty 
of  obedience,  and  to  demonstrate  that  it  is  not  be- 
neath the  dignity  of  the  Christian  to  be  subject  to 
civil  government.  So  far  from  offending  Christ, 
such  subjection  honours  him — for  it  is  yielded  to 
a  divine  institution,  and  for  the  same  reason,  it  can- 
not safely  be  withheld.     Hence  Paul  argues 

2.  From  the  sin  and  danger  of  resisting  civil 
authority y  and 

(1.)  The  sin.  "Whosoever,  therefore,  resisteth 
the  power,  resisteth  the  ordinance  of  God.^^ — 
Verse  2d. 

The  distinction  is  still  kept  up  between  the  in- 
stitution— "the  ordinance^'  of  Grod,  and  the  magis- 
trate in  whose  hands  the  reins  of  government  hap- 
pen to  be  found-  "  Whosoever  resisteth  the  power." 
A  most  important  distinction.  For,  in  truth,  there 
are  occasions  when  it  is  not  merely  lawful,  but  a 
matter  of  high  and  imperative  duty,  to  resist  autho- 

act  agreeably  to  his  will,  which  is,  that  they  should  pro- 
mote the  happiness  and  good  of  human  society,  which 
Paul  all  along  supposes  them  to  do.  And  consequently, 
when  they  do  the  contrary,  they  cannot  be  said  to  be  from 
God,  or  to  act  by  his  authority,  any  more  than  an  infe- 
rior magistrate  may  be  said  to  act  by  a  prince's  autho- 
rity, whilst  he  acts  directly  contrary  to  his  wilh"  Hoadly, 
p.  5. 


36  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

rity.  The  case  of  the  high  priest,  Azariah,  and  his 
brethren,  who  withstood  Uzziah,  king  of  Judah,  in 
his  attempt  to  pass  over  the  limits  of  his  power  and 
obtrude  into  the  priest's  office,  is  well  known  to 
every  reader  of  the  Bible :  ^'  It  pertaineth  not  nnto 
thee,  Uzziah,  to  burn  incense  unto  the  Lord;  but 
to  the  priests,  the  sons  of  Aaron,  that  are  conse- 
crated to  burn  incense :  go  out  of  the  sanctuary,  for 
thou  hast  trespassed/^  (1  Chron.  xxvi.  18.)  And 
still  more  to  the  purpose  are  the  cases  of  Shadrach, 
Meshech  and  Abednego,  and  afterwards  of  Daniel, 
who  all  refused  compliance  with  laws  enacted  by 
the  then  supreme  authority  in  Babylon  (Dan.  iii. 
vi.)  To  the  same  effect  is  the  refusal  of  Peter 
and  John  to  obey  the  command  of  the  Jewish 
magistracy  "not  to  speak  at  all,  nor  teach  in  the 
name  of  Jesus/'  They  reply,  "Whether  it  be 
right  in  the  sight  of  God  to  hearken  unto  you 
more  than  unto  G-od,  judge  ye,''  (Acts  iv.  18,  19.) 
Indeed,  until  of  late,  the  duty  of  refusing  to  obey 
the  commands  of  the  civil  power,  when  they  con- 
flict with  duty  to  God  was  never,  so  far  as  we  know, 
denied  by  any  bearing  the  name  of  Christian.  It 
is  certain  that  the  advocates  of  the  doctrine  of 
"passive  obedience  and  non-resistance"  during  the 
17th  and  18th  centuries  in  England,  did  not  go  so 
far  as  this.     The  very  terms  in  which  they  an- 


CIVIL  GOYEHNMENT.  87 

nonnced  their  doctrine  make  this  manifest,  ^^ pas- 
sive obedience,  non-resistance.''  They  acknow- 
ledged a  higher  law  than  the  enactments  of  hu- 
man, and,  of  course,  fallible,  and  often  impious 
power.  The  first  prominent  enunciation  of  the 
principle  of  unlimited  and  unquestioning  obedi- 
ence, was  reserved  for  an  atheist — Hobbes  of 
Malmesbury.  Denying  the  existence  of  any  fixed 
standard  of  right — and,  consequently,  of  any  such 
things  as  virtue  and  vice — this  speculative  philoso- 
pher resolved  all  the  laws  of  morality  into  one — 
the  will  of  the  legislature.  But  who  were  his  dis- 
ciples ?  None  but  the  godless,  the  dissipated,  the 
scorners  of  all  that  is  sacred.  The  heart  of  Eng- 
land was  shocked  at  the  daring  attempt  to  dethrone 
the  Almighty.  It  was  reserved  for  another  age 
and  another  land  to  hear  and  assent  to  the  blas- 
phemous assertion,  that  the  law  of  the  land  over- 
rides all  other  laws,  and  must  be  obeyed  under 
penalty  of  resisting  the  ordinance  of  Grod. 

But  we  may  go  further,  and  assert  that  Paul  did 
not  intend,  by  the  language  before  us,  to  forbid 
even  the  forcible  resistance  of  unjust  and  tyranni- 
cal civil  magistrates,  not  even  when  that  resistance 
is  made  with  the  avowed  design  of  displacing  of- 
fending rulers,  or,  it  may  be,  the  change  of  the 
very  form  of  the  government  itself.    There  are  few 


69  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

in  this  land,  or  in  any  free  country,  to  deny  tlie 
right  of  a  nation  to  rid  itself  of  oppressive  power 
— whether  foreign  or  domestic.  The  right  of  revo- 
lution, for  the  purpose  of  throwing  off  usui-ping 
or  tyrannical  rule,  need  not,  now  and  here,  be  de- 
fended. That  question  was  settled  in  England  by 
the  Revolution  of  1688,  when  the  nation,  rising  in 
its  might,  expelled  James  II.  as  an  enemy  to  the 
constitutional  rights  and  liberties  of  the  people. 
The  separate  national  and  independent  existence  of 
these  United  States  is  the  fruit  of  successful  revo- 
lution. And  where  is  the  American — the  Ameri- 
can Christian — who  does  not  rejoice  in  the  hope 
that  the  principles  of  liberty  will  spread  and  pre- 
vail, even  though  they  be  ultimately  established 
upon  the  wreck  of  thrones  demolished  or  over- 
turned ? 

Does  the  Spirit  of  God  here  condemn  these  ef- 
foi"ts  of  the  nations  to  rid  themselves  of  the  yoke 
of  despots?  Does  this  passage  rivet  the  chains  of 
the  oppressed?  Certainly  not.  God  denounces 
the  oppressor.  "Wo  to  him  that  buildeth  his  house 
by  unrighteousness  and  his  chambers  by  wrong,'* 
(Jer.  xxii.  13.)  "Wo  unto  them  that  decree  un- 
righteous decrees,  and  that  write  grievousness, 
which  they  have  prescribed.'*  (Is.  x.  1.)  And, 
to  say  nothing  of  the  threatenings — ^repeated  and 


CIVIL  GOVERNMENT.  39 

awful — against  the  ungodly  and  oppressing  powers, 
symbolized  by  tbe  "beast"  of  Daniel  and  of  the 
Kevelation,  we  have  the  striking  inquiry  of  Psalm 
xciv.  20 :  "  Shall  the  throne  of  iniquity  have  fel- 
lowship with  thee,  which  frameth  iniquity  by  a 
law?" 

Now  is  it  credible  that  notwithstanding  these 
denunciations,  the  Most  High  does  still  forbid,  un- 
der penalty  of  his  high  displeasure,  all  conflicts  for 
liberty  ?  That  he  so  far  takes  under  his  patronage 
ungodly  governments  which  despise  his  law  and 
his  Son — as  to  regard  any  opposition  to  their  au- 
thority as  opposition  made  to  his  own  holy  "ordi- 
nance" of  magistracy?  To  persuade  us  of  this, 
we  may  first  demand  the  clearest  evidence. 

It  is  evident  that  the  proper  interpretation  of 
this  passage  depends  upon  the  meaning  of  the 
phrase,  "ordinance  of  Grod."  What  then  is  its  im- 
port? Does  it  mean  any  and  every  existing  govern- 
ment ?  Does  it  mean  a  Phocas,  who  "  waded  to  the 
throne  of  the  Roman  Empire  through  seas  of 
blood  ?"  Does  it  mean  that  Joseph  of  Austria,  with 
his  government,  is  the  "ordinance  of  Grod"  to  Hun- 
gary? Does  it  mean  the  government  of  the  Pope 
and  his  cardinals,  under  which  the  Papal  States 
groan?  In  short,  is  this  term  applied  to  any  go- 
vernment merely  from   the   fact  that  it  exists? 


40  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

Clearly  not;  for,  then,  the  powers  just  mentioned 
must  be  also  embraced  in  it — a  conclusion  equally 
repulsive  to  the  Christian  and  to  the  friend  of  hu- 
man liberty.  And,  besides,  if  this  be  its  meaning, 
the  very  worst  government  has  the  very  same  right 
to  demand  an  unresisting  subjection,  as  the  very 
best,  for  both  alike  exist — exist  in  the  same  over- 
ruling and  all-controlling  providence;  and  both 
would  be  armed  with  the  same  high  sanction :  to 
''resist"  either,  would  be  to  make  the  same  assault 
upon  the  ''  ordinance  of  God  T' 

What,  then,  is  its  import?  The  reply  has  been 
already  anticipated.*  It  denotes  Cod's  moral  ordi- 
nance of  civil  government — it  refers  to  such  a  go- 
vernment as  Paul  afterwards  describes — a  govern- 
ment which  is  ''a  terror  to  evil-doers,  and  a  praise 
to  them  that  do  weir' — a  government  that  in  due 
measure  answers  the  ends  of  the  institution  of  civil 
rule,  a  government  of  law,  of  equity,  possessed  of 
moral  attributes,  and  ruling  "under  Cod,"  by  whom 
it  has  been  "ordered,"  for  the  execution  of  high 
and  useful  functions. 

Who,  then,  resists?     The  reply  is  at  hand,  and 

conclusive.     He  who  opposes  the  rightful  exercise 

of  civil  rule;  he  who  would  attempt  the  overthrow 

of  just  and  wholesome  authority;  he  who  endea- 

*  See  page  2a. 


CIVIL  GOVERNMENT.  41 

vours  to  weaken  the  hands  of  the  ^^ higher  powers'' 
in  their  performance  of  the  trust  committed  to 
them :  he  who  rises  against  the  restraints  imposed 
upon  the  hiwless,  the  profane :  he  who  wilfully  dis- 
turbs the  peace,  and  interferes  with  the  regular  ad- 
ministration of  justice :  for  such,  and  such  alone, 
assail  "the  ordinance  of  God."  Indeed,  we  may- 
well  ask  how  this  can  possibly  apply  to  any  but 
those  who  invade  the  good  order  of  the  common- 
wealth by  opposing  wholesome  rule  ?  The  end  for 
which  governments  were  established  is,  surely, 
more  important  than  government  itself,  and  much 
more  important  than  the  particular  form,  or  the 
mere  fact  of  the  possession  of  power  by  this  indi- 
vidual or  that.  How,  then,  can  any  one  be  re- 
garded as  chargeable  with  the  sin  and  crime  of  re- 
sisting Grod's  "ordinance,''  who  refuses  to  obey  an 
unjust  enactment,  or  who  even  goes  so  far  as  to  at- 
tempt the  overthrow  of  or  remodelling  of  a  govern- 
ment that  is,  by  tyranny,  or  injustice,  or  ungodli- 
ness, working  harm  to  society,  and  dishonour  to 
God,  and  so  tends  to  defeat  the  very  ends  for  which 
the  "ordinance"  of  civil  rule  was  established? 
The  commands  of  a  maniac  or  drunken  father  may 
be  disregarded — the  wife  or  even  the  children 
taking  the  government  into  their  own  hands — 
much  more  may  institutions  and  laws  be  disre- 
4 


42  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

garded  when  these  rim  counter^  either  in  their  con- 
stitution or  administration,  to  the  divine  law,  and 
thus  tend  to  the  manifest  injury  of  the  common 
weal.* 

But  does  not  this  tend  to  the  enfeebling  of  the* 
claims  of  even  legitimate  authority  ?  By  no  means. 
True,  all  institutions  administered  by  human  hands 
will,  necessarily,  bear  the  marks  of  human  imper- 
fection, and  it  may  be  difficult,  in  theory,  to  draw 
the  line,  and  say,  this  much  is  requisite  to  consti- 
tute a  government  on  which  we  may  inscribe  the 
title  "the  ordinance  of  God;"  but,  in  practice,  the 
difficulty  will  not  be  often  very  great — no  greater 
than  in  many  other  departments  of  duty.  Surely, 
we  may  go  so  far  as  to  affirm,  with  confidence,  that 
every  "ordinance  of  God'^  will  acknowledge  his 
claims — the  claims  of  His  Son  (we  speak  of  go- 
vernments in  enlightened  lands,)  and  the  supre- 
macy of  His  law,  and  will  ^.eeh  to  promote  the  wel- 
fare of  all  the  subjects  or  citizens. 

■^  "Now  this  being  the  argument  of  the  apostle,  all  that 
we  can  possibly  collect  from  his  injunctions  in  this  place 
is  this:  That  it  is  the  indispensable  duty  of  subjects  to 
submit  themselves  to  such  governors  as  answer  the  good 
end  of  their  institution;  to  such  rulers  as  he  here  de- 
scribes ;  such  as  are  not  a  terror  to  good  works,  but  to 
the  evil ;  such  as  promote  the  public  good,  and  are  con- 
tinually attending  upon  this  very  thing."    Hoadly,  p.  7. 


•       CIVIL  GOVERNMENT.  43 

That  tliis  doctrinej  moreover,  is  liable  to  be 
abused  by  the  lawless,  we  admit.  The  opponents 
of  the  slavish  principle  of  '^passive  obedience'^  en- 
countered the  same  objection.  Says  Bishop  Hoad- 
ly,  ^^The  great  objection  against  this,  though  it  be 
all  founded  upon  the  will  of  God,  who  sincerely 
desires  the  happiness  of  public  societies,  is  this, 
that  it  may  give  occasion  to  subjects  to  disturb  and 
oppose  their  superiors.  But,  certainly,  a  rule  is 
not  therefore  bad,  because  men  may  mistake  in  the 
application  of  it  to  particular  instances;  or  because 
evil  men  may,  under  the  umbrage  of  it,  satisfy 
their  own  passions  and  unreasonable  humours; 
though  these  latter,  as  they  are  disposed  to  public 
disturbance,  would  certainly  find,  out  some  other 
pretence  for  their  behaviour,  if  they  wanted  this. 
The  contrary  doctrine  to  what  I  have  been  deliver- 
ing, we  know,  by  an  almost  fatal  experience,  may 
be  very  much  abused;  and  yet  that  is  not  the  rea- 
son why  it  ought  to  be  rejected,  but  because  it  is 
not  true.  Every  man  is  to  give  an  account  for  his 
sins;  and  the  guilt  of  those  who,  under  any  pre- 
tence whatsoever,  disturb  the  government  of  such 
as  act  the  part  of  good  rulers,  is  so  great,  that 
there  cannot  be  a  stronger  motive  than  this  against 
resistance  and  opposition  to  such/'*     It  may  be 

*  Hoadly,  pp.  10,  11. 


44  CIVIL  GOVEENMENT.     ' 

added  that  every  argument  on  behalf  of  civil  liberty 
may  also  be  abused,  and  equally,  the  doctrines  of 
grace.  And  yet,  after  all,  we  need  not  much  fear 
any  liability  to  abuse  in  the  application  of  this 
principle,  provided  it  be  rightly  understood;  for 
its  very  basis  and  groundwork  is  that  Grod  has  or- 
dained civil  society  and  organization,  and  that  ex- 
isting institutions  are  only  to  be  resisted  when  they 
fail  to  answer  the  ends  for  which  government  has 
been  established  among  divine  ordinances,  while — 
and  this  is  the  apostle's  argument — to  "  resist  ^^  a 
government  which  is  really  an  ^^ ordinance  of  God'^ 
is  a  sin  of  heinous  character.  This  is  plainly 
taught  when  Paul  proceeds  to  enforce  subjection, 

(2.)  From  the  danger  of  resistance.  And  they 
that  resist  shall  receive  to  themselves  damnation, 
(^Kpv/itx — condemnation,)  v.  2.  From  what  quarter? 
from  the  government,  or  from  God?  That  the 
apostle  designed  no  more  than  to  assert  the  fact 
that  such  as  impugn  the  authority  of  government, 
or  resist  its  commands,  or  oppose  themselves  to  its 
authority,  will  meet  with  civil  punishment,  does 
not  appear  probable.  This  would  be  to  assert  a 
fact  too  well  known  to  require  so  emphatic  and 
solemn  an  enunciation.  Of  course,  no  government 
will  tamely  allow  its  injunctions  to  be  set  at  naught, 
so  long  as  it  bears  the  sword.     And,  moreover,  it 


'       CIVIL  GOVERNMENT.  45 

;eems  liardly  consistent  witli  the  high  and  religious 
tone  of  the  entire  passage,  to  understand  this  clause 
as  having  no  higher  reference  than  to  the  infliction 
of  civil  punishment  upon  the  disorderly  and  rebel- 
lious. What  immediately  precedes  contains  a 
pretty  distinct  intimation,  as  has  already  been  re- 
marked, of  the  fact  that  "resistance''  to  legitimate 
authority  is  not  only  a  sin,  but  a  sin  of  a  heinous 
character.  Nor  are  more  express  declarations  to 
the  same  effect  wanting  elsewhere  in  the  Word  of 
Ood.  We  may  refer  to  the  case  of  Korah  and  the 
princes  of  Judah,  whom  God  visited  with  a  most 
signal  token  of  his  wrath  for  this  very  sin.  "They 
went  down  alive  into  the  pit."  (Num.  xvi.)  And 
all  remember  the  sad  story  of  Absalom,  who  also 
died  in  the  same  sin  in  an  attempt  to  overturn  a 
lawful  power.* 

Still,  we  are  not  to  infer  that  the  sin  of  resisting 
civil  rule  involves  necessarily  eternal  ruin.  It  de- 
serves "condemnation."  God  sees  it.  It  highly 
offends  Him.  He  will  vindicate  his  own  "ordi- 
nance." And  why  not?  If  it  be,  as  it  certainly 
is,  a  most  beneficial  one — if  it  promote  directly 

^  Hodge  says,  **Paul  does  not  refer  to  the  punisliment 
wliich  the  civil  magistrate  may  inflict,  for  he  is  speaking 
of  disobedience  to  those  in  authority  as  a  sin  against 
<xod,  which  he  will  punish." 


46  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

every  temporal  interest,  and,  at  least,  indirectly 
"bears  upon  the  moral  and  religious  welfare  of  the 
community — if  successful  resistance  to  good  go- 
vernment opens  the  flood-gates  to  violence,  irreli- 
gion,  vice,  and  misery — if  no  interest  can  flourish 
when  good  laws  are  not  well  administered — can  it 
be  regarded  as  unworthy  of  the  Divine  Spirit  to 
attach  this  emphatic  sanction  to  the  institution  of 
civil  rule — to  assert,  in  this  explicit  form,  that  God 
will  mark  with  his  evident  disapprobation  every 
act  of  resistance  to  the  righteous  exercise  of  magis- 
tratical  power? 

On  these  high  grounds,  then,  does  Paul  enforce 
subjection  to  the  " higher  powers/^  Grovernment 
is  from  Grod — to  resist,  is  to  resist  his  "ordinance,^' 
and  ^^he  that  resists  receives  a  righteous  ^condem- 
nation/ ''* 

INFERENCES. 

1.  That  civil  government  is,  as  an  institution, 
from  God. — National  organization  is  not  the  mere 
creature  of  the  voluntary  action  of  the  inhabitants 
of  a  particular  country  or  district.  It  is  their  pro- 
vince, indeed,  to  establish  the  particular  institu- 
tions by  which  they  are  to  be  guided  and  governed; 
and  in  this  sense,  political  arrangements  are  "the 

*  See  Appendix  C. 


CIVIL  GOVERNMENT.  47 

ordinance  of  man/'  (1  Pet.  ii.  13.)  Still,  it  is  not 
optional  with  men  whether  such  an  institution  as 
civil  government  exist  at  all.  Grod  has  "  ordained" 
it.  And  it  is  important  to  remark,  that  govern- 
ment once  set  up,  its  rights  and  prerogatives  are 
not  loholly  determined  by  the  popular  will.  To 
some  extent  they  certainly  are ;  but  in  others  they, 
as  certainly,  are  not.  The  Most  High  has  fixed 
the  leading  ends  of  all  civil  rule;*  and  has  also 
defined,  to  some  extent,  the  means  to  he  employed 
in  efi"ecting  these.  It  is  not  optional,  for  example, 
with  any  people,  whether  they  shall  commit  to  the 
magistracy  the  power  of  inflicting  death  upon  the 
murderer — the  law  of  Grod  determines  this.  It  is 
a  subtle  question,  and  one  that  in  some  respects 
possesses  a  practical  importance — whether  civil 
power  is,  in  the  aggregate,  a  collection  made  up  of 
contributions  of  rights  thrown  in  by  individual 
members  of  the  commonwealth — each  resigning  a 
portion  of  his  own.  By  no  means.  No  man  has 
a  right  to  take  his  own  life,  and  yet  society  has  the 
right  to  inflict  capital  punishment,  and,  moreover, 
such  a  notion  is  entirely  inadmissible  on  another 
ground.     Man  was  made  for  society,  and,  hence, 

*  Tlie  fact,  and  what  these  ends  are,  will  be  the  sub- 
ject of  our  next  section. 


48  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

so  far  is  lie  from  being  necessarily  restricted  in  his 
rights  in  the  social  state,  that  it  is  as  a  member  of 
society  alone,  that  he  can  enjoy  all  the  privileges 
and  perform  all  the  duties  of  manhood. 

In  short,  while  the  people  of  a  country  have  in 
their  own  hands  the  setting  up  of  their  govern- 
ment, and  the  choice  of  rulers — when  this  is  once 
done,  and  riglithj  done — the  authority  by  which  the 
government  is  administered  is  to  be  regarded  as 
derived  from  the  divine  institution  of  the  ordinance 
of  magistracy.     Hence, 

2.  The  principal  standard  hij  iDliich  this  insti- 
tution is  to  he  measured  is  the  Word  of  God. — 
This  may  be  inferred  directly  from  the  fact  that 
the  scriptures  treat  so  fully  on  the  subject.  It  ap- 
pears in  each  Testament,  and  in  every  form  of  in- 
struction. There  are  didactic  passages — such  as 
that  before  us.  Of  this  character  are  the  teachings 
and  the  precepts  of  the  moral  law,  which  contains 
a  complete  exhibition  of  all  that  relates  to  the 
ends,  the  principles,  the  methods  of  civil  rule — and 
much  of  the  detail  respecting  magistratical  duties, 
and  their  correlates,  the  duties  of  subjects  and  citi- 
zens. The  narratives  of  the  Bible  largely  illustrate 
its  didactic  rules  and  precepts.  It  abounds  with 
exemplifications  both  of  good  and  bad  governments, 
and  the  issues  of  the  one  and  of  the  other.     Much 


CIVIL  GOVERNMENT.  49 

of  prophecy,  both  of  the  Old  Testament  and  of  the 
New,  is  designed  to  shed  light  upon  the  subject  of 
civil  polity,  and  the  divine  administrations  respect- 
ing it. 

Where  else  can  this  be  learned?  Not  from  the 
light  of  nature  merely.  True,  the  essential  prin- 
ciples of  social  organization,  and  even  of  political 
regimen,  are  contained  in  the  moral  law,  and  that 
law  is  the  same  that  was  inscribed  upon  the  heart 
of  man  at  his  creation.  But  the  "law  of  nature" 
is  not  to  be  confounded  with  the  "light  of  nature'' 
— the  law  as  a  complete  rule  of  human  duty  is 
man's  primitive  condition — the  light  that  is  now  in 
man  is  too  feeble  to  discern  it  in  any  thing  like  its 
holiness  and  perfection.  To  reject  the  Word  of 
God  in  this,  as  in  any  other  department  of  duty,  is, 
to  use  the  words  of  John  Brown  of  Haddington, 
"an  obstinate  drawing  back  to  heathenism." 

There  is  still  another  reason  why  we  must  refer 
to  the  Scriptures,  and  make  them  the  supreme 
standard.  There,  and  there  alone,  do  we  ascertain 
the  now  essential  principle  of  right  civil  rule,  the 
Headship  of  Jesus  Christ:  for  "He  is  made  head 
over  all  things  to  the  church,"  (Eph.  i.  22.)  To 
Him  "  all  judgment  is  committed,"  (John  v.  22.) 
He  is  "  Prince  of  the  kings  of  the  earth,"  (Bom.  i. 
5.)  And  not  merely  do  we  learn  this  fact,  but  having 


50  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

ascertained  it,  we  are  led  at  once  to  the  conclusion 
that  to  His  own  Word  must  we  now  address  our- 
selves, if  we  would  become  acquainted  with  that 
institution  itself  of  which  He  so  plainly  claims  the 
supremacy. 

3.  Disorderli/  and  seditious  hehaviour  is  here 
most  signally  rchuhed. — The  ordinance  of  magis- 
tracy, rightly  set  up  and  administered,  ranks  among 
the  most  important :  in  some  respects,  it  is  first  of  the 
institutions  with  which  men  have  to  do.  And  social 
order  is  of  itself  "of  great  price.''  How  wrong  to 
disturb  it  by  disorderly  and  lawless  conduct.  It 
is  sometimes,  indeed,  a  matter  of  no  little  moment 
to  determine  where  the  guilt  lies !  "We  would  not 
style  any  either  disorderly  or  seditious,  who  are 
contending  in  a  right  spirit  against  the  corruptions 
of  the  State,  or  of  the  public  administration  of  af- 
fairs. Sometimes  the  rulers  themselves  are  the  dis- 
turbers of  the  peace,  and  upon  them  falls  the  threat- 
ening of  this  passage.  However,  we  now  speak  of 
the  seditious  and  disorderly,  of  those  who  are  such 
in  a  community  where  a  scriptural  magistracy  and 
wholesome  rule  are  in  operation.  These  are  to  be 
regarded  as  chargeable  with  an  offence  of  no  inferior 
turpitude;  as  deserving  of  the  most  severe  repro- 
bation, and  as  fit  subjects  for  punitive  inflictions. 
And,  it  may  be  added,  that  the  spirit  of  peace  and 


CIVIL  G0VERNMEI!7T.  51 

order  should,  as  far  as  possible,  characterize  tlie 
conduct  of  those  who  dissent  from  unholy  and  op- 
pressive governments,  and  attempt  their  reforma- 
tion. 


SECTION  m. 

THE  DESIGN  OP  THE  APPOINTMENT  OF  CIVIL 
RULERS,  OR  OF  THE  INSTITUTION  OF  CIVIL  GO- 
VERNMENT. 

"For  rulers  are  not  a  terror  to  good  works,  but  to  the 
evil."     Verse  3. 

This  and  the  subsequent  section  furnish  us  with 
the  key  to  the  entire  passage.  Had  the  apostle 
merely  enjoined  subjection  to  civil  authorities,  as 
he  does  in  the  terms  of  verses  first  and  second, 
adding  no  explanations,  giving  no  clue  to  the  cha- 
racter of  the  power  to  which  his  injunction  is  de- 
signed to  apply,  it  would  have  been  difficult,  per- 
haps impossible,  from  the  jMssage  itself,  to  have 
shown  any  limitations — we  might  have  been  com- 
pelled to  resort  mainly  to  other  Scriptures  for  light 
as  to  the  duty  really,  after  all,  enjoined.  We 
might,  indeed,  have  obtained  some  light  from  the 
term  (j^ovticc,)  and  from  the  phrase  (^rsrccyf^ivoi 
vTTo  TO 'J  @Eov:)  we  could  have  evaded  the  advocate 


52  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

of  ^^ passive  obedience  and  non-resistance/^  but  we 
would  almost  have  despaired  of  convincing  him. 
But  with  the  apostle's  own  explanations  all  is  clear. 
He  enjoins  obedience,  but  he  adds  a  reason  drawn 
from  the  character  of  the  power,  and  so  limits, 
most  clearly  and  conclusively,  his  own  injunction: 
'•'■  for  rulers  are  not  a  terror  to  good  works,  hut  to 
the  eviir 

1.  Paul  here  defines  a  government  set  up  and 
engaged  in  attending  to  its  appropriate  functions: 
^^  Rulers  are  not  a  terror,"  &c.  Hitherto,  the  sub- 
ject has  been  government — civil  government  as  a 
divine  institution.  Here,  for  the  first  time,  we 
meet  with  a  direct  reference  to  magistrates  actually 
employed  in  administering  the  affairs  of  the  com- 
monwealth, including,  of  course,  legislators,  judges, 
and  executive  officers.  This  change  of  phraseology 
is  not  without  design.  It  is  clearly  intended  to 
establish  a  distinction — a  distinction  existing  in 
the  very  nature  of  the  case  between  the  institution 
of  government  and  governors  themselves.  The  in- 
stitution of  government  is  to  be  studied,  governors 
are  to  be  tried,  or,  if  the  expression  be  more  cor- 
rect, the  entire  character  and  operations  of  govern- 
ment, as  it  actually  exists,  urges  its  claims  upon 
the  citizen  and  the  Christian. 

2.  The  governors    to  whom  the  injunction  of 


CIVIL  GOVERNMENT.  53 

Paul  applies  ^^are  not  a  terror  to  good  works.'' 
To  wliat  does  Paul  here  refer?  to  what  class  of 
'^ works  ?'^  Does  this  phrase  mean  no  more,  as 
Tholuck  explains  it^  than  such  works  as  are  the 
opposite  of  resistance  and  rebellion?  Most  cer- 
tainly not.  Such  an  interpretation  puts  an  entirely 
new  meaning  upon  the  phrase  ^^good  works/'  and 
wouldj  moreover,  fix  upon  the  apostle  the  charge 
of  expressing  himself  with  an  unaccountable  ob- 
scurity and  meagreness.  Does  it  mean  such 
^^works"  as  industry,  honesty,  and  the  orderly 
discharge  of  common,  social,  and  relative  duties? 
No  doubt  these  are  included  in  it.  But  even  this 
is  a  very  defective  interpretation.  There  must  be 
added,  at  least,  such  things  as  come  under  the 
head  of  common  morality.  But  we  go  farther. 
Paul  here  speaks,  not  as  a  mere  heathen  philoso- 
pher, but  as  a  Christian  minister,  and  an  apostle 
of  Christ.  What  then  are  ^^  good  works?''  The 
answer  is  clear.  They  are  such  as  the  law  of 
Christ  demands :  they  are  all  the  external  results 
and  fruits  of  the  operations  of  the  Spirit  of  Christ. 
Among  these,  as  already  intimated,  will  be  found 
all  that  is  comprehended  under  the  name  of  morals  j 
but  they  include  much  more — Sabbath  sanctifica- 
tion,  the  public  profession  of  the  name  and  truth 
of  Christ — His  worship,  and  efforts  to  advance  his 
5 


54  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

kingdom  and  interest.  Thus  Epli.  ii.  10.  "Cre- 
ated in  Christ  Jesus  unto  good  icorhs."  2  Tim, 
iii.  17.  "That  the  man  of  God  may  be  perfect^ 
thoroughly  furnished  unto  all  good  worhsP  Tit. 
ii.  14.  "Zealous  of  good  loorhs.'"  1  Tim.  iii.  1. 
"  He  that  desireth  the  office  of  a  bishop  desireth  a 
good  worh.'*  2  Thess.  ii.  17.  "Stablish  you  in 
every  good  word  and  work  ;"  this  good  work  beings 
in  part,  what  is  referred  to  elsewhere  in  addressing 
the  Thessalonian  church,  that  from  them  "the 
word  of  the  Lord  had  sounded  out.'^  Rev.  ii.  26. 
"  And  he  that  overcometh  and  keepeth  my  works 
unto  the  end,  to  him  will  I  give  power  over  the 
nations;"  and,  finally.  Rev.  xiv.  13.  "Blessed  are 
the  dead  which  die  in  the  Lord — that  they  may 
rest  from  their  labours,  and  theh-  loorhs  do  follow 
them.'' 

It  is  not  denied  that,  in  most  of  these  passages 
and  similar  ones,  works  of  morality  are  meant;  but 
in  some,  the  immediate  and  only  reference  is  to 
"works"  peculiarly  denominated  religious,  and  in 
no  instance  can  these  be  excluded.  How  can  we 
imagine  that  Paul  departed,  in  the  passage  before 
us,  from  the  current  meaning  which  every  Chris- 
tian  attaches   to   this   phrase.*      Now,   to    such 

*  "For  temporal  princes — not  to  punish  men  for  any 
works  that  are  good  in  themselves  (like  those  which  the 


CIVIL  GOVERNMENT.  55 

'^works''  magistrates — those  referred  to  by  the 
apostle — "will  not  be  ''sl  terror.'^  Against  such  as 
practise  these,  he  will  enact  no  laws.  And  does 
not  the  principle  already  taught,  that  magistracy  is 
the  "ordinance  of  Grod/'  abundantly  confirm  this? 
It  is,  in  fact,  a  most  serious  error,  and  one  that  has 
led  to  many  others,  that  God  has  ordained  any  in- 
stitution among  men,  or  sanctions  any,  in  which 
the  promotion  of  his  glory  as  the  Supreme  Law- 
giver, and  the  alone  object  of  worship  and  religious 
homage,  is  not  a  chief  end.  "  The  Lord  hath  made 
all  things  for  himself,"  Job  xvi.  27.  And  of  every 
people,  in  a  certain  sense,  does  God  say,  as  He  said 
with  a  peculiar  emphasis  of  ancient  Israel,  and 
says  of  the  church,  "  This  people  have  I  formed  for 
myself,  to  show  forth  my  praise."  This  is  ex- 
pressly asserted  of  the  family  relation,  Mai.  ii.  15. 
And  as  to  government,  who  questions  that  among 
the  patriarchs,  all  authority,  including  what  we 
now  term  civil,  was  to  be  so  employed?  We  can- 
not conceive  of  an  intelligent  and  devout  patriarch, 
or  subject  of  patriarchal  government,  who  would 
not  regard  the  patriarchal  authority  as  given  for 
the  glory  of  God,  in  the  patronage  of  "good  works" 
of  a  religious,  as  well  as  of  a  common  moral  cha- 

Christian  religion  enjoins  toTvards  God  and  man,")  &c. 
Guyse  in  loco. 


56  CIVIL  GOVEKNMENT. 

racter.  And  finally,  God  himself  gave  a  govern- 
ment to  liis  OTvn  chosen  Israel,  and  in  defining  its 
powers  and  functions,  leaves  no  doubt  that  all  the 
''good  works ^^  to  which  this  government  was  not 
to  be  "  a  terror/'  were  works  such  as  have  been 
specified  above  as  those,  in  part,  intended  by  Paul. 
In  short,  there  is  every  reason — the  phrase  itself — 
the  ends  of  the  institution  of  government — its  his- 
tdry  and  the  direct  teachings  of  the  Most  High  in 
the  institutes  given  to  Israel — to  believe  that 
among  the  works  here  meant  are  those  that  come 
under  the  head  of  religion — religion  in  its  exterior 
manifestations. 

Now,  to  such,  ''rulers  are  not  a  terror.^'  Such 
rulers  as  Paul  refers  to  will  so  legislate,  so  judge,  so 
apply  law,  as  that  not  only  the  upright  and  peace- 
able, but  the  fearers  of  God  and  the  servants  of 
Christ,  will  be  subject  to  no  hinderance,  exposed  to 
no  danger  from  the  civil  arm,  in  their  Christian 
profession  and  efforts :  such  rulers  will  so  act  as 
that  Christ  may  be  preached,  his  law  defended,  his 
authority  maintained,  his  church  propagated,  with- 
out fear  of  offending  "  the  powers  that  be.'' 

3.  These  rulers  use  their  powers  for  the  restraint 
of  evil — ^'hut  'a  terror  to  the  evil.'  "  To  ascertain 
the  import  of  the  term  "evil,"  we  have  only  to  in- 
stitute a  contrast  between  this  clause  and  the  pre- 


CIVIL  GOVERNMENT.   .  57 

ceding.  "Grood  works"  are  such  works  as  are  ap- 
propriate to  the  honest,  peaceable,  and  moral.  Of 
course,  "evil  works"  are  such  as  dishonesty,  tur- 
bulence, theft,  and  all  gross  departures  from  mo- 
rality. "G-ood  works"  are  such  as  honour  Christ, 
the  Sabbath,  the  Scriptures,  and  the  name  and  su- 
preme dignity  of  a  Three-one  God.  "  Evil"  works 
are  such  as  are  adverse  to  all  these — blasphemy, 
profanity,  idolatry,  and  Sabbath  violation.  Can  it 
be  possible  that  an  inspired  apostle  could  use  this 
term  in  any  narrower  sense,  particularly  in  defining 
a  divine  ordinance? 

To  all  these  the  rulers  here  meant  are  for  a 
^^ terror,"  They  enact  such  laws,  and  so  administer 
these  enactments,  as  that  all  disorder,  vice,  and 
open  disregard  to  Grod  and  religion  may  be  dis- 
countenanced, and,  when  circumstances  demand 
this,  restrained. 

Here,  again,  we  may  appeal  to  collateral  sources 
of  argument,  to  the  uniform  testimony  of  the  Word 
of  Grod,  and  to  the  examples  of  all  enlightened  na- 
tions. To  the  former  we  need  only  refer.  From 
the  patriarchal  ages  onward  until  the  canon  of  Old 
Testament  revelation — none  can  doubt  that  divinely 
approved  civil  governments,  and  acts  of  civil  rulers, 
are  of  this  character — a  "terror  to  evil  works;" 
and  in  the  New,  so  far  as  this  aspect  of  national 
5* 


58  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

institutions  is  referred  to^  we  have  but  the  conti- 
nuation of  the  same  teachings.  ^^  The  law/'  says 
Paul — meaning,  in  part,  at  least,  the  law  of  God  as 
established  among  the  Jews — "is  not  made  for  a 
righteous  man,  but  for  the  lawless  and  disobedient, 
for  the  ungodly  and  for  sinners,'^  &c.;  and  "if  there 
be  any  other  thing  that  is  contrary  to  sound  doc- 
trine/'' (1  Tim.  i.  9-10.)  Nor  has  any  Christian 
nation  found  itself  able  fully  to  reduce  to  practice 
any  other  theory.  In  words,  many  do,  indeed,  deny 
that  acts  injurious  to  morality  even,  and  more,  that 
acts  hurtful  to  religion,  can  rightfully  become  sub- 
jects of  cognizance  by  the  magistrate;  but  just  so  far 
as  Christian  principle  has  made  itself  felt,  either  di- 
rectly or  by  tradition,  among  any  people,  have  they 
been  obliged  to  conform  to  the  apostle's  definition; 
very  defectively  it  is  true,  in  most  instances,  but  still 
sufficiently  to  show  that  Christian  sense  and  a  regard 
for  the  general  welfare  of  society,  will  not  be  satis- 
fied without  some  acknowledgment  of  the  principle. 
Hence,  the  laws  by  which  the  Sabbath  is  guarded 
— laws  against  shameful  vices — laws  against  blas- 
phemy and  profanity — or  to  present  the  same  fact 
in  a  more  general  and  more  striking  form,  where 
is  the  government  that  would  think  itself  justifiable 
in  guarding  against  the  spread  of  acknowledged 
moral  good,  as  they  do  of  moral  evil  ? 


CIVIL  GOVERNMENT.  59 

Nor  does  it  weaken  the  force  of  our  argument, 
drawn  from  the  practice  of  nations,  that  the  legis- 
lation to  which  we  have  referred  is  affirmed  to  be 
only  an  indirect  way  of  answering  what  some  call 
the  only  end  of  civil  rule — the  preservation  of 
peace  and  of  property.  At  all  events,  it  is  admitted 
to  be  necessary:  and  if  necessary,  there  can  be  no 
question  whatever  that  this  sort  of  governmental 
action  was  contemplated  in  the  institution  itself. 
So  far  as  our  present  purpose  is  concerned,  this  is 
enough;  for  Paul,  certainly,  did  not  intend  to 
omit,  in  his  definition  of  the  functions  of  rulers,  a 
class  of  acts  without  which  they  cannot  carry  on 
a  permanently  wholesome  administration  of  affairs. 

On  every  ground,  then,  we  maintain  that  Paul 
designs,  in  these  phrases,  to  furnish  us  with  a 
summary,  but  very  comprehensive,  view  of  the  offi- 
cial character  of  such  rulers  as  may  lawfully  claim 
our  conscientious  allegiance  and  subjection.  They 
are  such  as  render  themselves  ^^  a  terror  "  not  to 
^'  good  works,^^  in  any  sound  sense,  but  "  to  the 
evir'  in  every  sense  in  which  outward  acts  are 
so.  Such  are  the  ^^ powers^'  whom  '^Grod  has 
ordained/'  such  he  owns  as  his  ^^ministers/'  the 
resistance  offered  to  these  offends  him.  All  this 
we  will  find  amply  confirmed  by  the  Apostle  him- 
self when  he  proceeds,  immediately,  to  apply  the 


60  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

general  statement  to  tlie  different  classes  of  citi- 
zens in  the  State,  to  the  good  and  the  bad.* 

SECTION  IV. 

THE  APPLICATION  OF  THESE   PRINCIPLES   TO   THE 
CASE   BOTH  or  GOOD  AND  BAD  CITIZENS. 

**Wilt  thou  then  not  be  afraid  of  the  power?  Do  that 
■which  is  good,  and  thou  wilt  have  praise  of  the  same ; 
for  he  is  the  minister  of  God  to  thee  for  good.  But  if 
thou  do  that  which  is  evil,  be  afraid ;  for  he  beareth  not 
the  sword  in  vain,  for  he  is  the  minister  of  God,  a  re- 
venger to  execute  wrath  upon  him  that  doeth  evil." 
Verses  3  and  4. 

In  these  clauses  Paul  applies,  and,  in  so  doing, 
more  fully  illustrates,  the  doctrines  previously 
taught  in  regard  to  the  functions  of  the  civil 
magistrate.     He  makes  this  application : 

Fhst,  to  the  case  of  the  upright  and  faithful 
citizen.     And 

1.  Good  conduct  will  secure  certain  advantages 
under  such  a  government  as  he  has  described. 
V.  3,  "Wilt  thou  then  not  be  afraid  of  the  power  ? 
Do  that  which  is  good,  and  thou  shalt  have  praise 
of  the  same.''  The  fii'st  clause  seems  to  be  in- 
tended to  meet  an  objection;  an  objection  to  this 

"^  Inferences  will  be  deduced  from  this  section,  in 
connexion  with  those  of  the  subsequent  sectio^. 


CIVIL  GOVERNMENT.  61 

effect :  Civil  government  is  armed  with  terror — it 
addresses  itself  to  the  fears  of  men — and,  hence, 
it  is  inconsistent  for  a  Christian  to  regard  it  at  all. 
'^Well/'  says  Paul,  ''Wilt  thou  not  be  afraid?" 
Dost  thou  wish  not  to  he  afraid?  "Do  that  which 
is  good,"  and  you  need  cherish  no  fear.  The  law, 
as  armed  with  penal  sanctions,  "is  not  for  the 
i-ighteous  man."  (1  Tim.  i.  9.)  Such,  by  the 
grace  of  Grod  enlightening  and  guiding  them,  are 
a  law  to  themselves,  &c.,  hence  may  live,  and  do 
live,  under  just  civil  rule  without  fear,  at  least, 
without  slavish  fear — without  any  such  fear  as  is 
adverse  to  unalloyed  Christian  peace. 

And  even  more,  "Do  that  which  is  good,  and 
thou  shah  have  praise  of  the  same."  It  is  not,  of 
course,  to  be  inferred,  from  this  language,  that 
civil  government  is  instituted  for  the  purpose  of 
conferring  rewards,  in  any  gross  form,  upon  even 
the  best  citizens:  still  good  conduct  secures  praise; 
for  by  an  upright,  peaceable  and  Christian  deport- 
ment, good  citizens  acquire  reputation  and  influ- 
ence, and,  in  such  a  government  as  Paul  describes, 
this  class  of  citizens,  and  this  only,  would  be  ad- 
mitted to  places  of  power  and  trust.  These  are 
no  mean  rewards.  It  is  no  inconsiderable  result 
of  becoming  conduct,  that  it  attracts  the  favourable 
regard  of  the  community,  and  opens  the  way  to 
seats  of  more  eminent  influence. 


62  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

2.  This  the  Apostle  proceeds  to  confirm.  V.  4. 
^^For  he  is  the  minister  of  Grod  to  thee  for  good." 

We  have  here  a  two-fold  argument — one  drawn 
from  the  relation  which  the  magistrate  bears  to 
Grod,  another  from  the  end  of  his  appointment. 

(1.)  The  magistrate  is  GocVs  servant.  "For  he 
is  the  minister  (^^ixKovcg')  of  God;"  and  that  in  a 
sense,  not  materially  different  from  that  in  which 
ministers  are  styled  (<^<c6»avo/)  "servants  of 
Christ."  They  are  so,  inasmuch  as  they  adminis- 
ter a  divinely  appointed  ecclesiastical  constitu- 
tion, and  perform,  in  Christ's  name,  duties  which 
he  has  prescribed,  and  this  for  the  attainment  of 
ends  clearly  expressed  in  the  laws  pertaining  to 
the  church's  organization.  So  civil  rulers;  for 
they,  also,  are  called  to  administer  a  divine  insti- 
tution for  the  promotion  of  the  ends  contemplated 
in  the  ordinance  of  civil  society :  the  parallel 
holds  in  another  most  important  particular. 
The  servant  of  Christ  is,  necessarily,  under  law 
to  Christ,  not  only  as  accountable  to  Him  for  the 
manner  in  which  his  service  is  performed,  but  as 
the  very  performance  itself  is  regulated  by  laws 
which  Christ,  his  Master,  has  enacted.  So,  with 
some  limitations,  we  assert  of  the  civil  ruler.  He 
is  not,  indeed,  furnished  with  a  complete  code  of 
laws,  but  he  has  sufficiently  clear  intimations,  par- 


CIVIL  GOVERNMENT.  63 

ticularly  witli  the  Bible  before  him,  of  the  will  of 
his  Master:  he  is  to  be  ^^a  terror,  not  to  good 
works,  but  to  the  evil."  And  now  the  parallel 
ought  surely  to  hold  in  another  respect.- — Who 
will  say  that  that  man  is  a  ^^ servant  of  Christ/' 
even  although  he  occupy  the  seat,  and  professes 
to  act  in  that  character,  no  matter  how  many 
acknowledge  him,  who  disregards  the  law  of 
Christ,  perverts  the  gospel,  and  tramples  on  the 
rights  of  his  people?  What  Protestant,  for  exam- 
ple, acknowledges  the  Pope  of  Rome  as  a  ^'servant 
of  Christ?''  And  yet  he  has  his  millions  of  vota- 
ries, and  claims  to  be  Christ's  vicegerent.  He  is 
"a  servant  of  Christ,"  who  serves  Christ.  So,  in 
the  case  of  civil  rule.  How  can  he  be  the  servant 
of  God,  in  administering  civil  rale,  who  either 
denies  God's  supremacy,  or  perverts  the  ends  of 
government,  and,  particularly,  if  he  also  employ 
his  power  against  God,  his  law,  his  gospel,  his 
church  and  his  Son.* 

But,  to  return.  The  magistrate  is  ^^  God's 
servant,"   and,    hence,  it  must   be  the   end    and 

*  It  is  one  objection  to  this  that  Cyrus  is  called  God's 
shepherd.  (Is.  xliv.  28.)  This  refers  merely  to  the 
fact  that  Cyrus  was  raised  up  for  a  particular  purpose. 
The  devil  is,  in  the  same  providential  sense,  Christ's 
servant. 


64  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

design  of  his  office  to  do  God's  work.  God  is  his 
Master^  whose  law,  gospel,  glory  and  kingdom  the 
magistrate  must  seek  to  promote:  as  God  is  a 
praise  to  them  that  do  well,  so  must  the  ruler  be 
also,  for  he  is  called  to  act  as  his  servant. 

(2.)  The  magistrate  is  God's  servant  for  the 
good  of  God's  people.  "The  minister  of  God  to 
thee  for  good."  "To  thee!"  To  whom?  To 
every  citizen,  certainly.  The  design  of  the  ap- 
pointment of  civil  rulers  is,  that  they  may  be  use- 
ful— that  they  may  be  employed  in  securing  the 
rights,  the  liberty,  the  safety,  the  property,  of 
every  citizen.  As  previously  remarked,  "the 
civil  authority  extends  its  aegis  over  every  person 
and  every  interest  in  the  commonwealth."  Are 
we  at  liberty  to  exclude  the  Christian  citizen  ? 
Assuredly  not.  Indeed,  Paul  seems  to  refer  with 
peculiar  emphasis  to  the  godly.  To  them  he  ad- 
dresses this  epistle.  By  what  right,  then,  does 
any  one  undertake  to  say,  that,  in  this  phrase, 
Paul  alludes  only  to  the  citizen,  and  that,  merely 
in  reference  to  his  common  social  rights  ?  Every 
rule  of  interpretation  forbids  this.  We  do  not 
affirm  that  he  means  the  church  alone — not  even 
the  church  directly — but  we  are  assured  that  it  is 
"handling  the  word  of  God"  most  unfairly,  to 
exclude  the  church  and  the  faithful  in  their  cha- 


CIVIL   GOVERNMENT.  Qo 

racter  as  servants  of  Christ.  And  can  we  con- 
ceive it  possible  that  God  has  set  up  such  an  insti- 
tution^ armed  with  such  powers,  and  yet  has  done 
this,  without  any  regard  to  the  safety,  the  assis- 
tance of  his  own  friends,  the  disciples  of  his  Son, 
in  that  great  work  to  which  they  have  been  espe- 
cially and  imperatively  called  ?  This  is  impossi- 
ble: the  thought  is  dishonouring  to  God.  The 
magistrate  is  set  up  that  he  may  guard  the  rights 
of  every  member  of  the  community — protect  the 
weak  against  the  strong — restrain  all  violence — 
promote  every  good  work,  and  so  secure  the  wel- 
fare of  the  whole  community;  but  surely,  as  God's 
"servant,''  he  must  have  a  special  concern  for  the 
name,  and  cause,  and  kingdom  of  God,  as  these 
are,  in  a  still  higher  sense,  intrusted  to  the  faith- 
ful, and  exemplified  in  them. 

But,  is  this  all?  Has  the  "minister  of  God" 
fulfilled  his  whole  functions,  when  he  merely  se- 
cures the  religious  liberties  of  the  faithful?  He 
has  not.  He  is  a  "minister  tor  good/'  As  God's 
servant  to  do  his  work,  he  must  seek,  by  some 
positive  acts,  the  "good"  of  the  friends  of  God. 
He  must  be,  in  this  sense,  "a  praise"  to  them 
that  do  well.  He  must  give  them  encouragement 
and  sustain  them  in  their  Christian  efforts.  In  a 
word,  he  must  copy  the  example  of  the  patriarchs ; 
6 


66  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

for,  as  we  have  already  seen,  this  was  required  of 
them.  He  must  copy  the  example  of  godly  rulers 
in  Israel — as  far  as  the  general  principle  is  con- 
cerned, for  this  was  required  imperatively  of  them. 
He  must  not  fall  behind  even  heathen  kings,  who, 
like  Cyrus,  passed  decrees  and  promoted  their  exe- 
cution, for  the  re-building  of  Jerusalem  and  the 
establishment  of  Grod's  worship. 

2.  Paul  applies  the  doctrine  respecting  the  ends 
of  government  to  the  case  of  had  citizens.  V.  4. 
^'  But  if  thou  do  that  which  is  evil,  be  afraid :  for 
he  beareth  not  the  sword  in  vain :  for  he  is  the 
minister  of  God,  a  revenger  to  execute  wrath  upon 
him  that  doeth  evil.'' 

In  these  clauses  we  have  the  reverse  picture  of 
the  action  of  a  right  civil  government.  The  same 
general  arrangement  is  followed — 

1.  The  Apostle  asserts  that  evil  doers  have  rea- 
son to  fear  its  poioer.  "  But,  if  thou  do  evil,  be 
afraid. ''  This,  no  doubt,  refers  to  such  evil  acts 
as  strike  directly  at  the  authority  of  government, 
the  peace  of  society  and  the  property,  the  reputa- 
tion, or  the  life  of  well  disposed  citizens.  But,  it 
embraces  more.  Unless  we  are  prepared  to  limit 
it  as  neither  the  word  of  Grod  nor  the  practice  of 
enlightened  nations  warrants,  it  must  be  inter- 
preted in  a  wider  sense,  so  as  to  include  acts  com- 


CIVIL   GOVERNMENT.  67 

mitted  against  the  laws  of  morality — sucli  as  pro- 
fanity, blasphemy,  and  open  dishonour  done  to  Go4 
and  his  Christ — to  such  as  commit  these  the  faith- 
ful ruler  is  a  " terror ;^^  they  may  justly  fear  him. 
This  statement  Paul, 

2.  In  the  second  place,  confirms  :  for  (1.)  The 
magistrate  is  invested  ivith  punitive  powe7\  ^' He 
beareth  the  sword."  This  language  is  partially 
figurative.  The  "sword'^  is  the  emblem  of  the 
power  of  civil  government  to  inflict  pains  and 
penalties.  In  this  respect,  civil  authority  stands 
in  direct  and  striking  contrast  to  ecclesiastical; 
for  the  latter  has  no  other  power  than  that  which 
appeals  to  the  understanding,  the  heart  and  the 
conscience:  it  can  act  by  means  of  admonition, 
reproof,  exhortation,  and,  in  the  last  resort,  can 
place  the  erroneous  and  the  immoral  outside  the 
pale  of  the  visible  church.  Civil  authority  sus- 
tains itself  and  enforces  its  enactments  by  penal- 
ties of  a  different  sort,  when  necessary.  It  uses 
force,  not  as  the  only  means  of  securing  con- 
formity to  its  decrees,  for  it  also  may  use  admo- 
nitioti  and  persuasion — but,  as  the  last  resort, 
when  milder  measures  fail. 

The  '^  sword,"  moreover,  is  an  instrument  of 
death — for,  so  far  as  this  even  may  the  magistrate 
go,  in  the  punishment  of  signal  crimes,  either 


68  CIVIL    GOVERNMENT. 

against  the  State  or  its  citizens.  Still,  we  are 
not  to  infer  that  every  crime  is  to  be  punished 
with  this  extreme  penalty.  Far  from  it.  The 
^' sword"  here  is,  we  repeat,  an  emblem,  —  the 
power  of  the  sword  comprehending  every  grade 
of  penal  infliction,  from  the  smallest  fine  to  the 
severest  sort  of  punishment.  Civil  rulers  are  en- 
dowed with  power  to  affix  and  execute  suitable 
penal  sanctions. 

(2.)  Rulers,  such  as  Paul  here  intends,  vnll,  m 
this  respect,  do  their  duty.  "  He  beareth  not  the 
sword  in  vain."  The  righteous  magistrate,  who 
knows  his  place,  and  has  a  proper  sense  of  the 
nature  and  functions  of  the  magistracy,  will  not 
allow  the  transgressors  of  law  to  escape  with  im- 
punity. He  not  only  "  bears  the  sword  " — he  is 
not  only  armed  with  a  just  authority — he  will  use 
the  "sword:"  it  will  not  lie  idly  in  the  scabbard; 
he  will  exercise  the  power  with  which  he  has  been 
invested.  Faithful  to  his  calling  and  to  the  great 
interests  of  social  and  moral  order,  the  upright 
civil  functionary,  whether  in  a  higher  or  an  infe- 
rior station,  will  not  permit  Grod's  authority  to  be 
impugned,  or  the  interests  of  society  to  sufi'er,  from 
unrestrained  lawlessness — from  flagrant  breaches  of 
the  peace — from  rampant  immorality — from  gross, 
avowed  and  open  hostility  to  the  name  and  law  of 


CIVIL    GOVERNMENT.  69 

Grod.  To  be  indifferent  to  these,  or  to  administer 
law  partially,  inflicting  punishment  upon  the  weak 
and  unprotected,  while  the  evil  deeds  of  the  ele- 
vated and  strong  are  winked  at,  is  a  virtual  abdi- 
cation of  power.  Such  may  "bear  the  sword,'' 
but  they  bear  it  "  in  vain/'  They  are  no  more 
rulers,  as  Paul  speaks  of  them,  than  he  is  a 
soldier  who  neglects  or  refuses  to  draw  his  sword 
in  the  heat  of  the  conflict :  they  inspire  no  "  ter- 
ror;" evil  is  put  under  no  salutary  restraints, 
"evil"  in  its  worst  forms,  at  least.  In  short, 
the  magistrate  who  can  claim  the  subjection  here 
enjoined  is  no  idler;  he  acts,  even  in  this,  the 
most  trying  department  of  his  office ;  for 

(3.)  ^^  He  is  the  minister'  of  God.''  So  Paul 
has  already,  in  the  first  clause  of  this  verse,  styled 
the  magistrate,  but  in  a  different  connexion — in  a 
different  aspect  of  his  functions.  Then  he  con- 
sidered him  as  engaged  in  ministering  to  the  wel- 
fare of  the  good  and  honest,  particularly  Christian 
citizens — here  as  the  minister  of  God  in  another 
aspect,  and  yet  not  in  any  materially  different 
sense.  God  is  good.  He  is  a  beneficial  sove- 
reign. He  has  established  institutions  among 
men  for  the  good  of  man;  and  committed  their 
administration  to  the  hands  of  men.  So  far  as 
they  come  up  to  the  standard,  these  institutions, 
6* 


70  CIVIL    GOVERNMENT. 

in  their  actual  operation,  exercise  a  salutary  influ- 
ence over  all  who  subject  themselves  to  their  sway 
and  direction.  But  Grod  is  also  just — a  righteous 
law-giver.  The  divine  government  gives  no  coun- 
tenance to  sin  :  it  is  ever  against  it.  And,  hence, 
the  Most  High  has  invested  all  his  institutions  with 
some  kind  and  degree  of  restraining  power ;  and 
has  given  them  laws  by  which  they  are  to  be 
guided  in  the  disciplinary  or  punitive  department 
of  their  functions.  In  this  sense,  parents  are 
'^  ministers  of  God,^'  in  the  training  of  their  chil- 
dren— church  oflicers  in  the  exercise  of  discipline, 
^and,  now,  we  add,  civil  rulers  in  the  inflictions  of 
penal  law.  '^Servants  of  Grod;"  for  they  act  by 
his  authority,  and  are  limited  and  directed  by  his 
supreme  and  sovereign  enactments. 

But  why  does  Paul  introduce  this  here  ?  '  Partly 
to  justify  the  penal  administration  of  law,  partly 
to  gain  due  respect  for  the  magistrate  in  this  re- 
sponsible and  difficult  part  of  his  magistratical 
calling,  and  partly  to  confirm  the  preceding  state- 
ment, that  the  magistracy  of  which  he  treats  will 
not  allow  the  wicked  to  pass  unnoticed  and  unre- 
buked.  How  can  he  be,  "for  he  is  the  minister  of 
God^'  for  good  to  man.     He  is  also 

(4.)  ^^  A  revenger — to  execute  xcratli  wpon  him 
that  doeth  evil.''     'Ek^iko^- 


CIVIL  GOVERNMENT.  71 

properly,  an  "  avenger :"  for  the  Tinclication  of 
law,  in  its  excellence,  authority  and  obligation,  is 
not  '■'■  revenge,''  in  the  sense  commonly  affixed  to 
that  term.  Nor  does  the  word  properly  import 
this.  When  Paul  speaks  of  the  magistrate  as  an 
"  avenger/'  it  is  in  view  of  the  fact  that  the  end 
of  penal  sanctions  is  eminently  vindicatory.  In 
this,  the  civil  magistrate  is  the  "  minister  of  God" 
to  whom  "vengeance  belongs"  in  its  highest  and 
most  ample  sense — for  "  He  will  repay."  He  has, 
however,  invested  the  magistrate  with  a  portion,  so 
to  speak — a  small  portion,  indeed — -of  His  own  in- 
effable supremacy  and  power,  that  he  may  employ  it 
as  His  "servant"  in  the  maintenance  of  the  high 
claims  of  equity,  truth,  peace  and  purity  in  the 
commonwealth;  and,  that,  if  called  for,  he  may 
present  before  the  eyes  of  the  subject  or  the  citi- 
zen, examples  of  the  inflexible  demands  of  that  law 
which  is  "holy"  and  "just"  as  well  as  "good." 

If  these  views  be  correct,  it  appears  to  follow 
very  plainly,  that  the  "  wrath  "  which  the  magis- 
trate administers  implies  no  passion  of  resent- 
ment in  the  mind  of  the  ruler.  This  need  have  no 
place — in  all  ordinary  cases  ought  to  have  none. 
Eemembering  the  ultimate  source  of  his  power, 
the  G-od-fearing  judge  or  executive  officer  will 
calmly,  and  with  no  desire  of  personal  vengeance, 


72  CIVIL  GOVER^^MENT. 

apply  to   offenders  tlie  punishment  wliicli   their 
crimes  liaye  mentecL 

The  sum  of  this  entire  section  is — ^that  sueli 
magistrates  as  Paul  here  meass  will  not  he  remiss^. 
either  in  protecting,  and  fostering  the  good,  or  m 
punishing  the  had.  They  may  not,  they  will  not,  be 
perfects  Parents,  the  best,  are  not.  Ecclesiastical 
rulers  are  not.  Neitlier  can  we  look  for  perfection 
in  civil  functionaries..  But  at  these  objects  good 
rulers  will  aim. 

INFEEENCES^.. 

1.  It  is  emdent  that  the  apostle  enjoins  subjectiorH 
only  to  such  governments  as  ansicev  the  ends  of  the 
institution  of  magistracy.  Great  injustice  is  done 
to  this  passage  by  regarding  it  in  any  other  way 
than  as  a  whole.  Separate  the  first  and  second 
Yerses  from  the  context,  and  they  seem  to  inculcate 
a  blind  and  complete  submission  to  any  authority 
that. may  happen  to  exist.  Study  the  entire  pas- 
sage, and  we  learn  just  the  contrary. — That  the  con- 
stitution and  laws  and  magistrates  here  meant  hj 
the  ^'higher"  powers,  are  such  as  have  for  their 
•object  the  well-being  of  society,  and  the  glory  of 
God,  appears  from  the  connexion  between  the 
clauses  we  have  now  sought  to  explain,  and  the- 
apostle's  injunction  of  obedience.     "  Be  subject— 


CIVIL  GOVERNMENT.  73 

for  rulers  are  not  a  terror/'  &c.  Otherwise^  we 
must  lay  to  Paul's  charge,  and  to  the  charge  of 
the  Spirit,  by  whom  he  was  directed,  the  singular 
assertion,  that  every  government  that  can  possibly 
exist  is  "a  praise  to  them  that  do  well,"  as  Rome, 
Austria,  France!  The  governments  of  these 
countries  are  all  a  praise  to  them  that  do  well — no 
^'terror"  these  to  good  works!  The  truth  is,  as 
has  been  urged  before,  no  reference  is  made  what- 
ever to  bad  governments  or  bad  magistrates.  We 
here  again  refer  to  the  great  champion  of  the 
friends  of  liberty  as  against  high  prerogative  in 
England,  from  whom  we  have  already  quoted 
pretty  largely.  ^'We  may  judge,  from  what  I 
have  said,  how  little  ground  there  is,  from  any 
thing  here  delivered  by  Paul,  to  argue  to  so  un- 
limited a  submission  as  some  inculcate.  For  we 
see  he  hath  his  eye  all  the  way  upon  the  end  of  all 
government,  and  founds  his  precepts  upon  this 
supposition  that  the  rulers  answer  that  good  end. 
If  they  do  not,  or  if  they  set  themselves  to  contra- 
dict it  by  oppression,  violence,  and  injustice;  by 
invading  and  destroying  the  public  happiness,  and 
by  bringing  on  public  miseries;  the  apostle  seems 
not  to  think  of  recommending  submission  to  the 
subject.  For  whilst  he  commands  submission,  he 
puts  no  case  of  princes  acting  contrary  to  the  pur- 


74  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

pose  of  their  institutloii,  and  the  sole  business  of 
their  office,  much  less  of  princes  who  make  an  ex- 
press contract  with  theii'  people^  and  solemn  oaths 
to  preserve  their  rights  and  liberties^  and  after- 
wards break  through  all  these  ties  to  invade  their 
happiness.  Nor  doth  he  mention  any  thing  of  a 
passive  submission  in  such  cases;  but  plainly  leaves' 
nations  to  the  dictates  of  comm^on  sense  and  the 
powerful  law  of  self-preservation;  and  this  under- 
all  forms  of  government  eq^ually/'  ^^  That  governor 
who  contradicts  the  character  here  laid  down  by 
Paul,  who  is  not  a  terror  to  evil  works,  but  to  good; 
who  is  not  a  minister  of  good  to  the  virtuous,  but 
of  vengeance  to  the  wicked  only;  and  who  is  not 
continually  watching  for  the  good  and  happiness  of 
hum^n  society,  is  not  the  governor  whom  Paul 
means  in  this  place,  or  to  whom,  he  here  presseth 
obedience.  Can  any  one  deny  tliat  governors  are- 
thus  described  in  this  place?  or  that  those  go- 
vernors, which  are  here  described,  are  the  governors 
whom  Paul  here  pieans?  or  that  this  description  of 
his  is  the  argument  from  whence  he  presseth  sub- 
jection in  point  of  conscience?  and  doth  it  not  fol~ 
low  manifestly  from  hence,  That  the  governor  who. 
contradicts  all  this  description  is  not  the  governor? 
here  described,  and,  consequently,  not  the  governor 
to  whom  he  here  presseth  obedience  ?   Had  it  heeii 


CIVIL  GOVERNMENT,  75 

Paul's  design  to  press  obedience  to  tlie  gTeatest 
tyrants  and  oppressors;  or  had  he  had  ia  his  eye 
any  particular  emperor,  who  was  a  monster,  not 
only  of  rillany,  but  of  public  oppression  (as  some 
represent  his  sense;)  nothing  can  be  imagined 
more  unaccountable  than  that  he  should  give  such 
a  description  of  governors  as  to  exclude  those  whom 
there  was  most  occasion  to  mention,  and  that  he 
should  reason  Christians  into  a  conscientious  sub- 
jection in  such  a  manner,  as  cannot  conclude  for 
subjection  to  any  but  such  governors  as  he  de- 
scribes in  the  foregoing  words,  and  as  come  up  to 
that  sense  of  them  in  which  they  should  be  under- 
stood. And  if  any  one  can  prove  that  it  is  possible 
he  should  intend  by  governors  who  are  continually 
attending  to  the  good  of  their  subjects,  not  only  such 
but  also  governors  who  are  continually  attending 
and  watching  to  make  their  subjects  miserable; 
and  if  any  one  can  show  me  the  conclusiveness  of 
this  argument,  rulers  are  by  their  office  obliged  to 
be  a  terror  to  evil  works,  and  ift)t  to  the  good; 
therefore  you  are  obliged  in  conscience  to  submit 
to  them,  when  they  are  a  terror  to  good  works; 
then  I  will  retract  this  sentence."* 

*  Hoadly,  pp.  9,  21,  22.  It  is  but  just  to  state  that 
Hoadly  does  not  c?2>ec%  extend  the  "good  works"  and 
the  "evil"  so  far  as  we  have  done.   With  this  exception, 


76  CIVIL  GOTERNMENT. 

2.  Civil  government  sJiouId  extend  its  protection 
to  ever?/  class,  and  particidarl}/  to  tlie  more  feehle. 
It  sliould  be  a  "praise"  to  all  that  do  well — a 
"terror  "  to  all  that  do  ill.  Indeed^  nothing  can  he 
more  certain  than  that  the  defence  of  the  poor^  of 
the  weak,  was  one  chief  object  in  ordaining  civil 
anthority.  Surely,  it  was  never  contemplated  in 
the  divine  arrangements  in  reference  to  the  exercise 
of  civil  rule,  that  it  should  become,  in  his  name, 
the  instrument  of  establishing  and  protecting  vio- 
lence and  wrong — in  defending  the  strong  in  their 
avaricious,  cruel  oppression  of  the  destitute  and 
the  helpless.  That  civil  rulers  can  prevent  all 
wrong,  we  are  far  from  affirming — but  this  they 
should  aim  at.  If  they  do  the  reverse — ^if  they 
throw  their  shield  over  him  who  deprives  his  fel- 
low of  his  rights  and  liberties,  or  spoils  him  of  his 
property — in  short,  if  they  sanction  such  systems 
as  those  of  serfage  and  slavery,  or  even  of  political 
oppression,  they  are  not  the  rulers  here  designated. 
And  more  than«this,  and  still  more  plainly,  if  a 
government  deliberately  incorporate,  among  the 
principles  of  its  constitution,  such  wrongs,  how  can 

his  exposition  agrees  with  ours.  As  to  the  above  prin- 
ciple, he  goes  as  far  as  we  do,  utterly  denying  that  the 
mere  existence  of  a  government  entitles  it  to  obedience. 


CIVIL   GOVERNMENT.  77 

it  be  tlie  ordinance  of  Grod  for  good — or  its  rulers 
'^ministers  of  God  for  good/'  as  Paul  here  so  em- 
phatically styles  them  ?  The  victims  of  the  wrong 
may  be  few  comparatively, — they  may  belong  to 
despised  races,  but  no  matter — the  government 
that  gives  its  sanction,  knowingly,  to  injustice — 
that  tolerates  so  heinous  a  sin  and  crime,  cannot 
claim  a  place  among  those  here  meant.  It  may 
be  free,  in  other  respects — it  may  allow  unlimited 
scope  to  the  plans  and  efforts  of  i\iQ  favoured  class; 
it  may  be  endowed  with  many  attractive  features; 
but  if  it  be  the  patron  of  the  enslavers  of  men — if 
they  are  crowned  with  its  honours,  while  the  sub- 
jects of  their  ambition,  pride,  avarice  or  cruelty, 
are  cast  out  of  the  pale  of  law — and  is  not  this 
the  case  even  in  this  land  ? — ^such  a  government 
stands  here  condemned. 

3.  That  many,  at  least,  of  the  existing  govern- 
ments of  the  world,  have  no  claim  to  conscientious 
acknoidedgment.  Try  Austria.  Is  it  the  good, 
the  God-fearing,  the  disciples  of  Christ,  that  gain 
for  themselves  a  good  name  and  influence  in  that 
Empire?  Does  the  Austrian  government  prove 
*■'•  a  terror "  to  the  immoral,  the  profane,  the  im- 
pious? These  inquiries  bear  with  them,  in  the 
mind  of  every  intelligent  man,  their  own  answers. 
True,  even  Austria  does  not  employ  its  coercive 
7 


7S'  CIVIL   GOVERNMENT. 

power  against  every  thing  good.  It  permits  indus- 
try and  common  honesty,  and  will  restrain  the  rob- 
ber and  the  cheat.  But,  on  the  other  hand,  does 
it  not  forbid  the  free  circulation  of  the  scriptures  ? 
Does  it  not  discountenance  and  prove  itself  "a 
terror^'  to  pure  religion?  Does  it  not  exert  a 
power,  professedly  from  God,  to  prevent  the  dif- 
fusion of  genuine  Christianity?  As  all  know,  this 
iniquitous  government  lays  its  hand  upon  educa- 
tion, upon  the  church,  upon  the  Bible;  it  banishes 
missionaries,  it  builds  up  its  highest  barriers  against 
efforts  to  bring  its  millions  of  ignorant  and  deluded 
subjects  to  the  knowledge  of  ^^  the  truth  as  it  is  in 
Jesus."  And,  still  more,  its  great  aim  is  to  pre- 
vent free  thought,  free  speech,  and  the  free  cir- 
culation of  intelligence;  and  it  labours,  with  all 
authority,  to  keep  down  the  masses,  and  subject 
them  to  the  control  of  a  corrupt  and  pampered 
aristocracy.  Were  Paul — were  Christ  himself  to 
appear  among  them,  and  teach  as  they  taught, 
bonds,  imprisonment  and  death  would  await  them. 
In  a  word,  is  it  the  pious,  the  devout,  the  ener- 
getic Christian  to  whom  this  despotic  power  be- 
comes "a  praise?"     Nothing  of  the  kind. 

How  is  it  with  France  ?  The  reply  is  but  the 
repetition  of  our  account  of  Austria.  Famous, 
indeed,  has  France  been,  whether  as  kingdom, 


CIVIL   GOVERNMENT.  79 

republic,  or  empire,  for  its  rejection  of  Christ,  its 
hatred  of  his  people,  its  persecutions  of  the  faith- 
ful.* And  so,  Spain,  Portugal,  Tuscany,  Rome, 
Eussia,  and  others. 

These  considerations  derive  no  little  weight  from 
the  circumstance  that  it  is  not  mere  " submission '^ 
that  is  here  enjoined — it  is  active  obedience  and  sup- 
port. Whatever  government  Paul  means — -he  de- 
mands that  it  be  not  merely  an  outward  conformity 
to  its  will — but  a  hearty,  conscientious  aeknow- 
ledgment  of  its  claims.  Now,  surely,  the  Lord 
does  not  demand  that  we  should  recognise  even 
these  governments  as  his  ^^  ordinance '^ — give  them 
an  active  homage,  and  pay  them  that  reverence 
that  is  due  to  his  ^^ ministers!''  Do  not  ail  the 
friends  of  liberty  earnestly  desire  their  downfall; 
and  all  the  Christian  friends  of  liberty  pray  for 
it?  Paul  meant  no  such  government.  It  is  ridi- 
culous to  attempt  to  apply  his  description  to  such 
conspiracies  against  Grod  and  man  as  'the  govern- 
ments we  have  specified,  and  similar  ones,  are. 
They  have  no  place  to  stand  on  in  this  passage — 
they  are  ^^ found  wanting" — they  cannot  claim  the 
conscientious  obedience  of  the  subjects — they,  ene- 

•*  The  present  government  is  no  exception.  Protest- 
ants are  not,  indeed,  put  to  death,  but  they  are  discoun- 
tenanced, and  the  circulation  of  the  Scriptures  restrained. 


80  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

inies  of  Grod  and  of  man,  can  impress  no  sanction^ 
which  Grod  will  recognise,  upon  their  enactments. 
4.  Civil  government  is  instituted  for  the  promo- 
tion of  moral,  as  well  as  social  order,  among  men. 
That  one,  and  a  leading  end  of  civil  government,  is 
to  guard  the  rights  of  the  people;  in  other  words, 
that  it  is  designed,  not  for  the  rulers,  but  the 
ruled,  none  will,  probably,  be  now  disposed  to 
question.  It  is  not  so  generally  admitted — ^by 
many  it  is  expressly  denied — that  this  institution 
of  God  has  any  thing  to  do  directly  with  morals  or 
religion.  Few  are  willing,  indeed,  to  go  so  far  as 
to  dispute  the  existence  of,  at  least,  an  indirect 
power  in  society  to  cherish  the  interests  of  mo- 
rality— and,  perhaps,  it  would  be  admitted  that 
religion  should  receive  more  countenance  than 
irreligion.  But  this  passage  proves  more  than 
this.  It  proves — we  think  it  demonstrates — that 
there  is  a  direct  and  specific  obligation  lying  upon 
civil  rulers  to  have  an  eye  to  every  thing  that  goes 
to  promote  the  glory  of  God,  the  fountain  of  all 
power,  and  the  author  of  civil  rule.  They  are  not 
only  to  refrain  from  every  thing  that  would  inter- 
fere with  pure  religion  and  scriptural  morality,  but 
to  promote  well  doing — to  be  ^'a  praise  to  them 
that  do  well;"  and  ^'a  terror'^  to  all  evil  doers. 
Nor  can  it  be  fairly  objected  that  this  would  issue 


CIVIL  GOVERNMENT.  81 

in  persecution.  It  is  to  be  remembered  tliat  the 
law  of  Grod  is  their  rule,  and  that,  in  the  exercis 
of  their  power,  they  must  be  limited  by  its  pre . 
scriptions.  Unless  that  law  warrants  persecution 
rulers  cannot  persecute ;  and,  besides,  it  remains 
with  the  objector  to  show  how  the  patronage  of 
true  religion,  and  the  restraint  of  that  which  is 
dishonouring  to  Grod  and  hurtful  to  his  kingdom  > 
can  be  denominated  persecution. 

5,  CwU  rulers  are  under  imperative  obligations 
to  recognise  the  divine  supremaci/,  and  that  in 
their  official  diaracter.  Paul  here  styles  them 
the  ^^ ministers  of  God'^ — Grod's  servants.  The 
servant  should  know  his  master  even  among  men. 
And  still  more  should  he  who  professes  to  wield 
an  authority  derived  from  Grod,  in  administering 
an  "ordinance  of  Grod,'*  acknowledge,  reverence 
and  give  due  homage  to  his  sovereign.  This  ac- 
knowledgment should  be  practical.  It  does  not  con- 
sist in  a  mere  profession  of  belief  in  His  being,  or 
even  in  His  providence.  It  implies  the  study  of  his 
will,  and  a  constant  aim  and  ejQTort  to  please  Him. 
The  ruler,  or  the  nation,  that  claims  to  be  above 
all  other  authority,  demanding  an  unquestioning 
obedience  to  mere  human  law — that  denies  the 
existence  of  a  "higher  law,^^  is  in  rebellion  against 
<xod — is  not  a  "  servant,^^  in  Paul's  sense.  And 
7* 


82  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

more  than  this,  the  acknowledgment  must  he  di- 
rect, and  in  express  terms — it  must  he  an  acknow- 
ledgment— ^among  enlightened  people — of  the  su- 
premacy of  the  Most  High;  of  his  laws,  as  the 
Scriptures  teach  them.  Further,  still,  this  ac- 
knowledgment must  be  rendered,  not  to  the  God 
of  the  deist — but  to  the  only  true  Grod — the  Chris- 
tian's Grod — to  God  in  Christ. 

Does  the  refusal  to  acknowledge  God  invalidate 
the  authority  of  a  government  as  tyranny  does  ? 
Why  not  ?  Surely,  if  God  has  ordained  this  in- 
stitution for  his  glory — if  he  has  put  it  under  his 
law — if  he  has  designed  to  exhibit  in  it  something 
of  his  own  majesty,  (^^I  said  that  ye  are  gods;'' 
Ps.  Ixxxii.)  it  is  difficult  to  see  how  a  govern- 
ment that  denies  the  Maker  and  Lord  of  all — or 
withholds  from  him,  from  his  law,  and  from  his 
Son,  even  an  acknowledgment,  can  claim  his  sanc- 
tion upon  its  acts  ?  Surely,  God  does  not  threaten 
with  "damnation  "  those  who  refuse  to  bow  their 
consciences  before  his  enemies  I* 

6.  It/oIlowSy  indisputahli/,  from  the  wJiole  tenor 
of  verses  3  and  4,  that  civil  rulers  should  he  God- 
fearing men.  Every  clause  demonstrates  this. 
If  a  ruler  should  be  a  "terror"  to  evil  works, 

*  This  subject,  and  kindred  ones,  mU  be  taken  up  m 
a  subsequent  section. 


CIVIL  GOVERNMENT.  83 

and  a  '^  praise  to  them  that  do  well '' — if  the  ma- 
gistrate is  '^  a  minister  of  Grod  " — if  he  is  under 
law  to  Grod  in  his  official  doings — if  his  duties  are 
most  onerous  and  responsible,  involving  the  high- 
est interests  and  dearest  rights  of  the  citizen — ^if 
his  magistratical  acts  bear,  with  no  little  direct- 
ness and  force,  upon  the  interests  of  morality  and 
religion,  surely,  rulers  should  be  men  of  principle, 
of  integrity,  of  Christian  character.  There  is,  in 
fact,  something  monstrous  in  the  idea  of  commit- 
ting the  administration  of  an  eminent  divine  insti- 
tution to  the  hands  of  the  immoral  and  irreligious : 
and,  if  this  be  done  by  the  vote  of  the  people,  can 
it  be  otherwise  than  offensive  to  the  supreme  moral 
Governor  ?  On  this  point,  also,  we  have  the  most 
explicit  testimony  of  God  himself:  -^'Moreover, 
thou  shalt  provide  out  of  the  people  able  men — 
such  as  fear  God — men  of  truth,  hating  covetous- 
ness.'^  (Ex.  xviii.  21.)  "He  that  ruleth  over 
men  must  be  just,  ruling  in  the  fear  of  God.'^ 
(2  Sam.  xxiii.  3.) 

Nor  can  it  be  objected  that  these  are  Old  Testa- 
ment injunctions.  The  last  is  a  general  state- 
ment; equally  true — equally  obligatory,  in  all 
ages.  And,  though  the  first  was  a  law  addressed 
to  Israel  in  the  wilderness,  it  is  no  less  binding 
now  than  then.     It  is  a  declaration  of  the  will  of 


84  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

God  in  tlie  matter  to  whicli  it  relates.  No  reason 
can  be  assigned  why  it  should  be  regarded  as  now 
set  aside.  Surely,  the  clearer  light  which  the 
New  Testament  sheds  upon  the  things  of  God, 
does  not  diminish  either  the  duty  or  the  necessity 
of  appointing  to  office  none  but  such  as  may  be 
expected  to  honour  the  supreme  law  and  moral 
Governor — who  will  pay  due  regard  to  the  heaven- 
ordained  ends,  laws  and  relations  of  civil  govern- 
ment. Moreover,  this  law  is  characterized  by 
divine  wisdom.  How  can  it  be  hoped  that  the 
immoral  or  the  irreligious  will  faithfully  adminis- 
ter law  ?  Will  such  men  regard  their  oaths  ? 
The  safety  of  the  community  demands  that  the 
power  of  legislating,  and  of  judging,  and  of  en- 
forcing law,  should  be  kept  out  of  the  hands  of 
the  personally  ungodly  and  impure.  And,  finally, 
there  is  no  little  stress  to  be  laid  upon  the  matter 
of  example.  We  again  quote  Hoadly:  "To  all 
other  qualifications  there  must  be  joined  a  blame- 
less example.  The  reason  is,  because  every  thing 
that  tends  to  promote  religion  and  happiness  in  a 
society,  is  the  concern  of  all  who  have  authority 
in  it.  Now,  it  is  with  those  who  are  to  punish 
vice  and  protect  virtue,  just  as  it  is  with  those 
who  are  to  teach  the  practice  of  virtue,  and  the 
abhorrence  of  vice.     It  is  an  observation,  easy 


CIVIL  GOVERNMENT.  85 

and  obvious  to  every  body,  that  those  who  are  the 
preachers  of  righteousness  do  no  great  service  to 
the  cause;  but,  perhaps,  the  contrary,  if  their  ex- 
amples, unhappily,  contradict  their  precepts.  And 
it  is  certainly  the  same  with  respect  to  those  whose 
business  it  is  to  punish  vice.  If,  whilst  they  pu- 
nish it  in  inferiors,  they  themselves  are  known  to 
be  guilty  of  it,  the  correction,  indeed,  may  make 
the  offender  avoid  the  light;  but  it  will  never 
make  him  in  love  with  virtue.  He  will  be  apt  to 
think  he  is  punished  only  because  he  is  poor,  and 
not  considerable  enough  to  be  in  office  himself; 
and  may  be  hardened  to  vice,  whilst  he  sees  men 
making  use  of  their  authority  in  punishing  others 
only,  as  it  were,  for  a  screen  to  their  own  greater 
indulgence.^' 

7.  Government  is  endowed  icitli  the  right  of  in- 
jiicting  cajpital  punishment.  Of  the  ruler,  it  has 
been  said,  ^^He  beareth  the  sword,'' — an  emble- 
matic expression,  but  importing,  also,  literally,  a 
power  to  take  life  in  extreme  cases. 

8.  The  injiiction  of  penal  sanctions  hy  national 
authorities  is  not  solely  for  reformation^  hut,  also, 
and  even  primarily,  for  the  vindication  of  the  law. 
It  is  not  affirmed  that  the  execution  of  law  con- 
sists entirely  in  acts  of  a  punitive  character.  It 
would  be  so,  provided  government  had  been  esta- 


86  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

blished  with  no  other  view  than  to  protect  the 
peaceable  citizen.  Such  a  notion  is  most  deroga- 
tory to  the  magistrate  and  the  government.  The 
civil  ruler  would  then  be  no  more  than  a  police- 
man, and  government  a  system  of  police.  Grovern- 
ment  has  higher  functions.  It  is  a  "praise^'  to 
them  that  do  well.  And,  hence,  it  takes  an  inte- 
rest in  all  that  promotes  a  quiet,  industrious  and 
moral  behaviour — -it  provides  for  the  education  of 
the  people — it  ought  to  interest  itself  in  the  main- 
tenance of  pure  religious  observances. 

But,  after  all,  there  will  be  the  lawless  and  the 
vicious,  who  must  be  encountered  and  kept  in  awe 
by  the  display  of  the  "terrors'^  of  justice.  For 
such  characters,  and  for  such  ends,  mainly,  penal 
sanctions  are  annexed  to  law.  They  serve,  indeed, 
a  useful  purpose  in  the  case  even  of  the  orderly, 
for  none  are  perfectly  free  from  disturbing  pas- 
sions— but  their  main  use  is  to  alarm  those  who 
can  be  addressed  through  no  other  avenue  than 
their  fears.  The  language  of  the  passage  before 
us  is  most  explicit — the  magistrate  is  a  "revenger 
to  execute  wrath.''  By  inflicting  penalties,  he 
exhibits  the  desert  of  transgression,  and  shows 
that  law  is,  indeed,  law — that  it  is  no  mere  nerve- 
less utterance  of  the  supreme  power,  but  a  thing 
of  life  and  of  energy.     Still,  it  needs,  also,  to  be 


CIVIL  GOVERNMENT.  87 

remembered  that  this  vengeance  of  the  law  is  far 
from  being  mere  vengeance — 'it  has,  even  as  exer- 
cised upon  the  offender  himself,  except  in  the  case  of 
capital  punishment,  a  wholesome  influence — and, 
in  all  cases,  it  serves  as  an  admonition  to  others 
"that  they  may  see,  and  fear,  and  do  no  more 
wickedly/' 

SECTION  V. 

THE  PRINCIPLES   OF   OBEDIENCE   TO   CIVIL  RULE. 

This  topic  has  been  incidentally  noticed  in  com- 
menting upon  the  duty  itself;  but  it  is  made  the 
subject  of  a  distinct  statement. 

"  Wherefore,  ye  must  needs  be  subject,  not  only  for  -wrath, 
but  also  for  conscience'  sake."    V.  5. 

1.  Obedience  is  to  he  rendered  i^artly  to  avoid 
penal  inflictions — "for  wrath's  sake.^'  It  is  not 
very  material  to  determine  whether  the  Apostle 
here  refers  to  the  "wrath  of  the  magistrate,  or  of 
God,  or  of  both.''  If  to  the  firsts— and  the  con- 
nexion in  which  the  term  occurs  seems  to  warrant 
this  view — it  still  implies  that  the  displeasure  of 
God,  also,  rests  upon  him  who  withholds  due  sub- 
jection from  the  authorities  previously  described. 
It  is  more  important  to  remark  that  this  phrase 


88  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

has  been  frequently  applied  to  express  that  sort  of 
submission  which  the  slave  gives  to  his  master,  or 
the  oppressed  to  the  power  of  the  despot — a  sub- 
mission altogether  forced,  in  which  there  is  no 
heartfelt  recognition.  There  is  such  a  subjection 
to  lawless  authority,  and  such  a  submission  may 
be  given  on  this  principle.  Moreover,  this  term 
is  appropriate  enough  as  thus  applied.  But  it  has 
not  this  meaning  here.  As  has  been  frequently 
stated  already,  Paul  refers,  in  this  passage,  to  no 
usurped,  tyrannical  or  godless  power.  He  speaks 
of  but  one  kind  of  government — one  sort  of  rulers : 
a  government  worthy  of  obedience — rulers  who  are 
"  ministers  of  Grod." 

This  phrase,  as  we  find  it  in  the  passage  before 
us,  may  be  regarded  as  referring  to  that  class 
whom  we  have  styled  ^'bad  citizens;"  for  they 
are  kept  under  only  by  fear  of  punishment.  But 
this  is  not  all.  The  Apostle  is  addressing  Chris- 
tians— urges  upon  them  a  subjection  of  a  different 
and  contrasted  character — ^'  not  for  wrath's  sake," 
but  for  higher  considerations;  as  much  as  to  say, 
whatever  others  may  do :  thei/  may  be  prompted  to 
conduct  themselves  peaceably  and  according  to 
law,  only  from  selfish  reasons — but  let  it  not  be 
so  with  you ;  you  should  have  another  and  a  bet- 
ter spirit.     Still  this  cannot  be  the  leading  object 


CIVIL  GOVERNMENT.  89 

in  the  introduction  of  this  clause,  for  this  interpre- 
tation leaves  out  of  view  a  very  important  word. 
Paul  does  not  barely  say  ^^not  for  wrath's  sake" — 
but,  "not  only  for  wrath's  sake" — intimating  that 
this  may  be  exhibited  as  a  principle  of  obedience 
even  in  addressing  the  upright  citizen.  And  the 
subsequent  clause  confirms  this;  for,  he  adds, 
"but  aho  for  conscience'  sake."  Nor  does  this 
represent  the  passage  as  urging  a  principle  un- 
worthy of  the  Christian.  Subjection  to  lawful 
authority  merely  for  fear  is,  indeed,  radically  de- 
fective ;  but  such  a  fear  is,  collaterally,  a  lawful 
principle  of  action.  Hence,  in  covenanting  with 
Adam,  the  Most  High  appeals  to  this  principle  : 
"The  day  thou  eatest  thereof  thou  shalt  surely 
die."  In  fact,  the  penalty  is  essential  to  the  law 
in  the  case  of  all  fallible  creatures.  It  is  "law" 
from  the  very  fact  that  it  is  armed  with  such  a 
sanction.  And,  besides,  it  must  be  remembered 
that  even  the  best  are  here  imperfect — that  they 
are,  in  fact,  under  the  influence  of  corrupt  emo- 
tions and  appetites,  and,  consequently,  require  the 
restraining  influence  of  such  considerations  as 
those  to  which  the  inspired  writer  here  appeals. 
God  deals  with  even  the  faithful  as  subjects  of 
discipline.  He  warns  them  of  paternal  displea- 
sure in  case  they  sin,  and  "when  they  do  sin,  visits 


90  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

them  with  his  chastisements.  And,  finally,  the 
Apostle  here  brings  to  view  the  majesty  and 
terror  of  civil  government,  not  as  belonging  to 
itself  alone,  but  as  a  transcript,  however  faint,  of 
the  ineffable  dignity  and  eminence  of  Him  in 
whose  name  'Hhe  sword^^  is  borne  and  used.  In 
short,  there  is  here  presented  one — though  an  infe- 
rior one— -of  the  principles  which  move  the  citizen, 
or  the  subject,  to  a  whole-souled  obedience  to  the 
lawful  commands  of  a  lawful  power.  There  is 
another;  for,  it  is  added, 

2.  ^^  But  also  for  conscience^  saheJ'  All  know 
something  from  their  own  experience  of  the  nature 
and  workings  of  conscience.  Philosophers  may 
debate  the  question,  whether  it  is  a  distinct  fa- 
culty, or  the  result  of  the  operation  of  certain 
faculties;  but  all,  learned  and  unlearned,  agree 
that  it  is  through  the  action  of  conscience  that 
man  is  made  to  feel  his  accountability  to  the  In- 
visible and  Supreme.  It  implies,  if  it  does  not 
essentially  consist  in,  the  possession  of  a  moral 
sense;  a  sense  which  judges  of  right  and  wrong, 
not  by  any  humanly  enacted  law,  or  with  reference 
to  the  judgment  of  an  earthly  tribunal,  but  in  view 
of  a  law  of  divine  obligation  and  the  presence  of 
an  unseen  Judge.  "We  believe  it,"  says  McCosh, 
"  to  be  an  original,  a  divinely  appointed,  a  funda- 


CIVIL'  GOVERNMENT.  91 

mental  law.  Still,  thougli  persons  could  succeed 
in  analyzing  it,  it  would  not  be  the  less  a  law. 
Suppose  there  is  nothing  else  in  the  mind,  when 
contemplating  moral  actions,  but  the  springing 
up  of  emotions,  still  there  must  be  a  Heaven- 
appointed  law,  otherwise  the  emotions  would  not 
be  so  invariable.'' 

Conscience  then  has  ever  an  eye,  in  all  its  judg- 
ments and  dictates,  to  the  tribunal  of  God.  But 
to  what  particular  duty,  or  aspect  of  duty,  are  its 
judgments  directed  as  it  is  here  introduced  by  the 
apostle  ?  An  attempt  has  been  made  to  connect  it 
with  the  preceding  clause;  as  if  Paul  designed  to 
enforce  a  bare  heartless  submission,  for  "wrath's 
sake,"  to  an  unjust  or  a  hard  governmental  autho- 
rity, out  of  conscience  towards  God. 

Now,  it  is  not  denied  that  in  case  such  submis- 
sion is  properly  yielded,  and  we  have  admitted  that 
in  certain  instances  it  may  be,  it  should  be  yielded 
with  a  good  conscience.  The  slave  who  plies  his 
labour  at  the  bidding  of  even  a  tyrannical  master, 
may  do  this  conscientiously — in  part,  as  he  regards 
his  condition  in  the  light  of  an  aflfliction  befalling 
him  in  the  providence  of  God,  and  in  part,  as  he* 
may  be  influenced  by  a  respect  to  certain  other 
considerations,  such  as  his  own  comfort,  which 
every  man  is  bound  to  promote,  so  far  as  he  can, 
without  sin,  in  the  exemplification  of  a  meek  and 


92  CIVIL   GOVERNMENT. 

quiet  spirit,  even  under  the  infliction  of  wrong. 
But  to  this  the  apostle  makes  no  reference  here. 
Unless  we  have  mistaken  altogether  the  drift  of 
the  passage,  that  it  relates  to  good  governors,  it  is 
impossible  that  he  could.  And,  moreover,  Paul 
does  not  say,  ^^  Submit  for  fear  of  punishment,  out 
of  conscience  towards  Grod:'^  giving,  in  the  last 
clause,  a  reason  for  the  injunction  of  the  first,  or  a 
rule  to  guide  in  fulfilling  it:  ^^hut  we  must  needs 
be  subject,"  that  is  under  obedience,  "not  only 
for  wrath's,  but  also  for  conscience'  sake;"  thus  as- 
signing not  one  reason,  but  two  distinct  ones. 
And,  finally,  this  verse  is  clearly  a  conclusion 
from  the  whole  of  the  preceding  exhibition  of  the 
nature  and  functions  of  civil  power.  "  Therefore," 
inasmuch  as  the  "higher  powers"  are  "ordained 
of  Grod" — inasmuch  as  "rulers  are  a  terror  to  the 
evil,  but  a  praise  to  them  that  do  well" — inasmuch 
as  government  is  a  divine  and  a  beneficent  institu- 
tion, "ye  must  needs  be  subject  for  conscience' 
sake." 

The  last  paragraph  embodies  the  substance  of 
the  meaning  of  this  clause.  To  obey  for  "con- 
science' sake"  is  to  obey  because  God  requires  it — 
because  the  lawful  magistrate  is  invested  with  a 
legitimate  authority  to  administer  an  ordinance  of 
God's  appointment  —  because  the   judgment    is 


CIVIL  GOVERNMENT.  9^ 

'^the  Lord's."*  And,  finally,  because  a  good  go- 
vernment is  conducive  to  the  peace,  the  morality, 
the  religious  interests  of  society. 

This  is  the  true,  as  it  is  a  high  principle  of  obe- 
dience to  civil  rule.  And,  in  fact,  in  the  case  of 
good  citizens,  it  is  the  main  reason  why  wholesome 
laws  are  conformed  to.  Such  have  respect,  not  to 
any  mere  human  arrangements,  but  to  an  institu- 
tion which  bears  the  impress  and  sanction  of  God's 
name,  law,  wisdom,  supremacy,  and  majesty. 
Wherever  these  are  seen,  the  homage  and  alle- 
giance of  the  godly  are  sincere  and  genuine.  They 
yield  no  mere  outward  and  constrained  service. 
What  they  do  as  members  of  the  commonwealth, 
they  do  "as  to  the  Lord, and  not  unto  men.'^ 

REMARKS. 

1.  It  is  not  left  optional  with  men  whether  they 
support  righteous  civil  institutions  or  not.  We 
mean  as  before  Grod.  That  the  citizen  may — that 
he  must — "prove"  civil  institutions  and  laws,  has 
already  been  inferred  from  the  preceding  state- 
ments and  reasonings  of  this  passage.   But  having 

*  2  Chron.  xix.  8.  Of  course  it  is  not  meant  that  the 
magistrate  is  infallible,  but  he  acts  with  God's  sanction 
in  so  far  as  he  acts  rightly. 

8* 


M  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

proved  these  and  found  them  endowed  with  the  at- 
tributes of  Grod's  moral  ordinance  of  magistracy — 
having  proved  the  magistrates  themselves,  and  the 
design  and  tendencies  of  their  administration,  and 
approved  them,  he  is  not  at  liberty  to  withhold  the 
outward  tokens  of  his  approval.  ^' Conscience  ^^ 
has  to  do  with  it.  It  has  to  do  with  Him  who  is 
^^  Lord  of  the  conscience. '' 

2.  All  obedience  to  civil  authority  is  limited  hy 
the  higher  allegiance  due  to  God  its  author.  To 
imagine  otherwise  is  to  annihilate,  by  the  law  of 
God,  its  own  authority  and  sanctions.  All  right 
subjection  to  civil  rule  regards  it  as  the  creature  of 
Grod,  but  no  more.  It  surely  does  not  give  it  Grod's 
place.  Indeed  nothing  can  be  more  absurd  than 
the  notion  that  "conscience,"  which  always  sees 
Grod  as  supreme  in  His  claims  and  power,  should, 
for  a  moment,  substitute  any  "lower  law"  for  His. 
This  would  be  to  deny  its  own  nature — to  act  in 
direct  opposition  to  the  very  law  of  its  being. 
And,  hence, 

3.  Every  attempt  to  establish  a  paramount  claim 
for  any  mere  hiwian  enactment  is  really,  under  the 
pretence  of  doing  honour  to  government,  to  imperil 
the  stahility  and  efficiency  of  all  authority.  What 
could  any  government  do — unless  one  of  mere 
force — without  the  aid  and  co-operation   of  the 


CIVIL  GOVERNMENT.  95 

principle  of  conscience  ?  And  what  do  they  seek 
to  accomplish,  who  deride  *^The  Higher  Law,"  but 
to  sap  the  very  foundations  of  the  social  state? 
Instead  of  being  the  friends,  such  men  are  the  very 
worst  enemies  of  civil  government.  Could  they 
absorb  the  conscience  of  the  individual,  and  de- 
prive him  of  the  right  and  the  disposition  to  judge 
for  himself,  in  the  light  of  Grod's  law,  and  supre- 
macy, and  word,  they  would  but  make  a  community 
of  the  very  lowest  order  of  slaves,  and  thus  sow  the 
seeds  of  inevitable  disorders  and  revolutions.  They, 
and  they  alone,  are  the  friends  of  civil  law  and 
social  order,  who  vindicate  the  paramount  claims 
of  the  supreme  Potentate,  and  maintain  the  rights 
of  an  enlightened  conscience.     Hence, 

4.  3Iay  he  ascertained  the  reason  why  the  nations 
are  so  generally  dissatisfied y  and  that  the  more  as 
knowledge  increases^  with  existing  governments. 
It  is  because  they  find  in  them  so  little  that  bears 
the  stamp  of  rectitude  of  aim;  so  little  that  bears 
the  impress  of  the  divine  majesty.  True,  there  are 
the  lawless — the  vicious — who,  under  any  adminis- 
tration, would  require  the  exercise  of  a  restraining 
hand.  The  discontent  we  refer  to  is  not  only  of 
such.  It  is  that  of  the  thoughtful,  the  intelligent, 
the  benevolent,  the  devout.  Their  dissatisfaction 
may  not  always  make  itself  manifest,  but  it  is  not 


96  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

the  less  real.  It  appears  in  the  withdrawing  of 
many  good  men  from  all  active  concern  in  politics;, 
and  in  the  longing  of  the  pious  for  the  coming  of 
a  time  when  iniquity  shall  no  longer  find  refuge 
under  the  wings  of  power — when  the  legislators 
and  executive  officers  of  the  nations  shall  he  trust- 
worthy men — when  the  entire  workings  of  the 
social  fabric  shall  be  eminently  conducive  to  the 
promotion  of  individual  and  national  weal.  It 
will  be  well  for  the  world  when  civil  government 
shall  be  avowedly  restored  to  the  domain  of  con- 
science— conscience  toward  God,  His  law,  His 
Christ,  and  His  gospel. 


SECTION  VI. 

A  SPECIFIC   STATEMENT   OF  THE   DUTIES   OF   SUB- 
JECTS AND  CITIZENS. 

Thus  far  the  duty  of  subjection  has  been  stated 
in  general  terms,  and  pressed  upon  general  consi- 
derations. The  apostle  now  proceeds  more  in 
detail. 

1.  The  requisite  contributions  are  to  be  made 
for  the  maintenance  of  government. 

^^ For,  for  this  cause  pay  ye  tribute  also:  for  they  are 
God's  ministers^  attending  continually  upon  this  very  thing.** 
Verse  6. 


CIVIL  GOVERNMENT.  97 

The  word  here  rendered  ^^ tribute'^  (^(popovq) 
signifies,  literally — as  does  our  word  by  which  it  is 
rendered — the  contributions  levied  upon  a  con- 
quered state  or  province.  It  also  means  any  direct 
tax  laid  indiscriminately  upon  all  citizens — such 
as  land  tax,  capitation  tax,  or  a  tax  upon  personal 
estate;  and,  even  more  generally,  any  kind  of  levy 
by  which  national  revenues  are  gathered,  with  the 
exception  of  customs.  This  is  its  meaning  here, 
and  the  payment  of  such  taxes  is  enforced  by  a 
three-fold  argument — and,  (1.)  From  the  nature, 
and  ends,  and  benefits  of  civil  rule.  ^^For  this 
cause  pay  ye  tribute."  Some  expositors  regard  this 
clause  as  referring  to  the  preceding  verse,  and, 
consequently,  as  urging  a  conscientious  response  to 
the  pecuniary  demands  of  government.  To  this 
interpretation  there  can  be  no  doctrinal  objection. 
This  is,  in  fact,  the  very  gist  of  the  precept  con- 
tained in  the  entire  verse.  It  is  better,  however, 
to  consider  this  clause  as  looking  back  to  the  whole 
of  the  foregoing  teachings  of  the  apostle  on  the 
subject  of  civil  power  and  its  exercise,  with  spe- 
cial reference  to  the  great  argument  which  lies  at 
the  foundation  of  the  general  duty  of  subjection — 
the  fact  that  civil  government  is  no  mere  human 
arrangement,  but  a  divine  institution.     (2.)  The 


98  CIVIL   GOVERNMENT. 

apostle  argues  from  the  fact  that  magistrates  are 
God's  ^^ministers/'  That  they  are  so,  has  been 
previously  stated,  and  the  import  of  the  term  we 
have  attempted  to  explain,  viz.,  that  it  designates  ci- 
vil rulers  as  the  servants  of  God,  not  in  the  general 
way  in  which  all  things,  even  inanimate,  serve 
Him,  inasmuch  as  they  are  controlled  by  His 
power,  and  guided  by  His  hand,  so  that  they  are 
instruments  of  accomplishing  his  unalterable  pur- 
poses; but  in  a  limited  and  specific  sense,  as  they 
are  employed  in  administering  his  law,  in  adminis- 
tering authority  which  He  has  ordained,  in  exe- 
cuting functions  which  he  has  prescribed.  In  other 
words,  magistrates  are  God's  "ministers,"  in  a 
sense  analogous  to  that  in  which  ecclesiastical 
functionaries  are  "ministers"  of  Christ.  This 
view  is  clearly  expressed  by  the  term  here  rendered 
"ministers."  It  is  not  the  same  with  that  used  in 
the  fourth  verse.  There  it  is  "  ^tcocavoiy"  here  it 
is  "?.£/Tay/3y«<"-— a  title  given  by  the  Athenians 
to  those  employed  by  the  state  in  particular  offices 
by  national  appointment,  and  often  used  by  the 
inspired  writers  in  the  sense  of  holding  a  public 
office  or  ministry.  In  Heb.  x.  11,  it  denotes  the 
exercise  of  the  priestly  office.  The  occupant  of 
civil  power— by  whatever  form  of  lawful  procedure 
invested  with  power — is   still  the  "minister"  of 


CIVIL   GOVERNMENT.  99 

God»  To  withhold  such  contributions  as  the  exi- 
gencies of  the  government  require,  is,  consequently, 
a  dishonour  done  to  G-od,by  whom  the  magistrate  has 
been  appointed  and  his  duties  assigned.  (3.)  The 
payment  of  taxes  is  a  duty  inasmuch  as  they  are 
justly  due-— ^ue  upon  the  principle  of  work  done, 
and  benefit  conferred.  ^^  Attending  continually 
upon  this  very  thing/'  Not  the  collection  of  taxes 
merely.  It  is  impossible  that  this  can  be  the 
apostle's  meaning.  Civil  rulers  are  not  mere  tax 
gatherers.  And  those  who  are  specially  employed 
in  this  department  are  principally  of  that  class  to 
whom,  least  of  all,  the  passage  refers.  The  magis- 
tracy— -a  good  magistracy,  and  the  apostle  speaks 
of  no  other — ^^attend"  to  higher  duties,  to  the  ad- 
vancement of  the  public  weal,  the  promotion  of 
peace,  of  social  and  moral  order,  of  religion,  of  the 
glory  of  God.  On  this  ground,  then,  it  becomes  a 
duty  to  contribute  conscientiously  to  the  national 
funds.  There  is  a  service  rendered — a  work  done 
— benefit  received;  and  on  the  common  principles 
of  equity  which  regulate  all  matters  of  a  pecuniary 
kind  in  common  intercourse  and  business. 

It  may  be  regarded  as  strange  that  this — as  we 
would  probably  regard  it  —  inferior  civil  duty 
should  thus  be  made  to  occupy  the  first  place  in 
the  detailed  exhibition  of  what  is  comprehended  in 


100  CIVIL  GOVEKNMENT. 

"subjection"  to  the  "higlier  powers."  Further 
reflection  shows  the  wisdom  of  this  arrangement; 
for  while  the  moral  and  industrious — good  citizens 
— and  such  are  here  mainly  addressed,  though  the 
duty  of  all  is  taught — will  not  be  easily  drawn  into 
any  course  of  conduct  adverse  to  social  order,  it  is 
by  no  means  so  easy,  even  for  such,  to  bear  in 
mind  the  fact  that  taxes  are  to  be  conscientiously 
paid — that  to  defraud  the  public  revenues,  directly 
or  indirectly,  is  to  sin  against  Grod — not  only  on 
the  ground  and  for  the  reason  that  it  is  sin  to 
withhold  from  any  what  is  their  due,  but  also  for 
the  specific  reason  that  the  magistrate  is  Grod^s 
'^  minister,"  and  that  thence  it  is  a  kind  of  sacri- 
lege to  refuse  to  contribute  to  the  public  treasury. 

Having,  for  some  such  reason  as  we  have  as- 
signed, presented  this  duty,  separately  and  dis- 
tinctly, Paul  proceeds, 

2.  To  present,  in  one  view,  the  whole  range  of 
duties  owing  to  civil  rulers. 

"Eender,  therefore,  to  all  their  dues ;  tribute  to  whom 
tribute;  custom  to  whom  custom;  fear  to  whom  fear; 
honour  to  whom  honour."     Verse  7. 

The  subject  is  still  that  of  civil  rule,  and,  hence, 
the  first  clause,  which  in  its  terms  admits  of  a  wider 
extension,  is  limited  to  the  general  subject  of  the 
passage:   "Render  to   all"   in   authority  "their 


CIVIL  GOVERNMENT.  101 

dues;"  for  among  the  ^^ higher  powers"  some  are 
employed  particularly  in  one  department,  and  some 
in  another.  Let  each  receive  that  sort  of  subjee- 
tion  which  his  peculiar  place  renders  especially  im- 
perative.    And, 

(1.)  As  before,  "Tribute  to  whom  tribute."  (2.) 
"Custom  to  whom  custom."  The  rendering  here 
is  literal  and  exact.  The  word  used  by  the  apostle 
(reAos)  has  precisely  the  signification  here  given 
it.  It  denotes  that  sort  of  revenues  which  is  ga- 
thered by  impost  laid  upon  property  imported  from 
other  nations — as  tribute  ((popog)  comprehends  all 
kinds  of  revenues  raised  within  the  national  boun- 
daries. (3.)  "Fear  to  whom  fear;"  meaning  not 
a  slavish  fear,  but  that  awe  which  a  righteous  ad- 
ministration of  power  is  designed  and  calculated 
to  awaken  in  the  mind  of  the  subject  of  civil  rule; 
such  an  awe  as  leads  to  a  quiet  and  orderly  obedi- 
ence to  the  law  and  its  appointed  judges  and  exe- 
cutors. (4.)  "Honour  to  whom  honour;"  for  the 
magistrate,  worthy  of  the  name,  deserves,  "for  his 
work's  sake,"  as  occupying  a  high  place  as  Grod's 
"minister,"  a  peculiar  esteem,  regard,  and  homage. 
His  person  should  be  treated  with  respect,  and  his 
faithful  administration  of  law  should  secure  to  him 
the  unfeigned  respect  of  the  citizen  and  the  Chris- 
tian. And  this,  not  only  for  his  office'  sake,  or  his 
9 


102  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

work's  sake,  but  as  essential  to  the  due  influence 
of  his  authority  in  the  restraint  of  the  disobedient 
and  the  lawless.  For,  if  "honour^'  be  not  paid 
him — if  his  attempts  to  vindicate  just  law,  and  to 
advance  the  public  interests,  be  not  sustained  by 
the  good  opinion  of  the  order-loving  portion  of  the 
community — if  they  indulge  in  contempt  of  his 
person,  it  is  evident  his  authority  will  be  little 
feared  by  that  class  of  the  population  which  espe- 
cially requires  the  control  of  sound  legislative  and 
judicial  action.  It  was  a  precept  of  heavenly  wis- 
dom, "Thou  shalt  not  speak  evil  of  the  ruler  of 
thy  people.'* 

We  have  said  the  magistrate  "worthy  of  the 
name;"  for  neither  reason  nor  scripture  demands 
or  even  justifies  the  rendering  of  honour  to  the  ty- 
rannical, the  immoral,  the  profane,  the  godless. 
Reason  does  not;  for  this  would  tend  to  confound 
all  moral  distinction.  To  honour  the  undeserving 
is  contrary  to  every  right  feeling — to  every  intelli- 
gent conviction;  for  what  claim  to  "honour,"  as 
"the  minister  of  Grod,"  has  one  like  the  present 
Emperor  of  France — a  licentious,  godless  adven- 
turer, elected  by  craft  and  violence  to  his  seat  of 
power;  or  a  Pius  IX.  the  occupant  of  a  blasphe- 
mous throne — the  deceiver  and  oppressor  of  his 
ruined  States — the  prime  leader  in  Satan's  grand 


CIVIL  GOVERNMENT.  103 

array  against  Christ  and  his  gospel?  Such  may- 
wear  the  crown — they  may  shine  in  purple  or  in 
scarlet — they  may  receive  the  homage  of  the  pliant 
and  interested  tools  of  their  base  conspiracies 
against  Grod  and  man, — hut  right  reason  forbids 
us  to  regard  them  with  that  "honour"  which  the 
power  "  ordained  of  God  "  may  justly  demand. 

The  Scriptures  most  clearly  sanction  what  in  this 
matter  reason  teaches.  Saul  was  King  of  Israel; 
but,  at  the  same  time,  he  was  a  rebel  against  God; 
and  Samuel,  the  Lord's  prophet,  thus  addressed 
him,  ''I  will  not  return  to  thee;  for  thou  hast  re- 
jected the  word  of  the  Lord,  and  the  Lord  hath  re- 
jected thee  from  being  king  over  Israel."  (1  Sam. 
XV.  26.)  And  Elisha,  born  within  the  limits  of 
the  ten  tribes,  not  only  withheld  all  tokens  of 
"honour"  from  their  idolatrous  king,  Ahab,  but 
publicly  denounced  him  as  unworthy  of  the  notice 
of  the  Lord's  prophet :  "  As  the  Lord  of  hosts 
liveth,  before  whom  I  stand,  surely,  were  it  not  that 
I  regard  the  presence  of  Jehoshaphat  the  King  of 
Judah,  I  would  not  look  towards  thee,  nor  see 
thee."  (2  Kings  iii.  14.)  And  our  Lord  himself, 
speaking  of  Herod,  says,  "Go  ye,  and  tell  ihsit/ox, 
Behold,  I  cast  out  devils,  and  I  do  cures  to-day  and 
to-morrow,  and  the  third  day  I  shall  be  perfected,'* 
(Luke  xiii.  32.) 


104  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

^^Hononr"  is  too  precious  to  be  lavished  upon 
the  base;  the  godkss,  tlie  cruel. 

REMARKS. 

1.  Common,  every-day  duties  are  to  he  performed 
religiously. — This  is  clearly  implied  in  the  whole 
strain  of  the  verses  before  us.  They  embrace  the 
discharge  of  all  civil  duties,  the  whole  subject  of 
obedience  to  the  law;  and  the  motives  by  which 
these  are  enforced  are,  throughout,  religious. 
That  is  not  true  religion  whose  practical  influence 
extends  no  farther  than  acts  of  devotion,  or  to  re- 
lations merely  domestic  and  ecclesiastical.  Ge- 
nuine piety  and  godliness  are  all-pervading.  The 
heart  of  the  truly  devout  is,  in  every  principle,  in 
every  emotion,  in  every  purpose,  quickened  and 
renovated  by  a  new  and  energetic  life;  a  life  pos- 
sessed of  such  properties  as  necessarily  constitute  * 
it  a  universal  principle  of  action.  ^'If  any  man 
be  in  Christ,  he  is  a  new  creature — old  things  are 
passed  away;  behold,  all  things  are  become  new," 
(2  Cor.  V.  17.)  Hence,  even  the  making  of 
pecuniary  contributions  for  the  maintenance  of 
government,  is  an  act  to  be  performed  with  an  eye 
to  the  law  and  authority  of  God,  as  the  prime  con- 
sideration. That  sort  of  religion  which  confines 
its  guiding  and  restraining  influence  to  any  limited 


CIVIL   GOVERNMENT.  105 

sphere  should  not  merely  be  suspected  but  de- 
nounced. The  sincere  Christian  will  be  a  Chris- 
tian in  the  mart  of  business,  in  the  hall  of  legisla- 
tion, in  the  seat  of  science,  in  the  executive  chair, 
and  in  the  walks  of  social  intercourse.  He  stands 
ever  in  direct  contrast  with  the  godless — for  "Grod 
is  in  all  his  thoughts,^'  and  he  is  bound  by,  and  ought 
to  feel  the  obligations  of  the  divine  law  and  the 
responsibilities  of  the  Christian  character,  in  every 
place,  relation,  and  act, — and  can,  of  course,  no 
more  sanction  or  do  any  thing  to  sustain  error, 
heresy,  or  wrong,  blasphemy,  idolatry,  or  oppres- 
sion, Socinianism,  popery,  or  slaveholding,  when 
employed  in  civil  or  political  functions,  than  in  the 
family,  the  sanctuary,  or  the  court  of  ecclesiastical 
judicature.     Hence, 

2.  It  is  equally/  clear  that  all  civil  duties  are  to 
he  done  with  reference  to  Christ  as  the  adminis- 
trator of  the  law  of  Heaven. — It  is  admitted  that 
the  passage  before  us  makes  no  direct  allusion  to 
Christ  as  the  medium  of  all  true  and  acceptable 
obedience  to  G-od.  But  this  is  not  the  less  implied. 
If  magistrates  are  to  be  ^^feared'^  and  "honoured'^ 
devoutly  and  religiously,  it  must  be  in  Christ. 
Moreover,  we  may  and  ought  to  compare  Scripture 
with  Scripture.  One  passage — as  this — enjoins 
duties,  and  states  the  general  principles  on  which 
9* 


106  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

they  are  to  be  performed :  other  passages  exhibit 
the  precise  form  in  which  the  service  is  to  be  ren- 
dered. Turning  to  these  we  find  their  light  and 
teaching  clear  and  explicit.  The  Master  himself 
says :  ^^  No  man  cometh  to  the  Father  but  by  me." 
And  again :  ^'The  Father  judge  th  no  man^  but  hath 
committed  all  judgment  to  the  Son,  that  all  men 
should  honour  the  Son,  even  as  they  honour  the 
Father.  He  that  honoureth  not  the  Son  honoureth 
not  the  Father  which  hath  sent  him."  And  finally, 
speaking  by  Paul :  ^^  And  whatsoever  ye  do,  do  it 
heartily  as  to  the  Lord,  and  not  unto  men,  knowing 
that  of  the  Lord  ye  shall  receive  the  reward  of  the 
inheritance,  for  ye  serve  the  Lord  Christ,"  (John 
xiv.  6;  V.  22,  23;  Col.  iii.  24,  25.) 

3.  The  Scriptures  are  a  complete  and  perfect 
rule  of  ohedience. — The  main  design,  indeed,  of 
divine  revelation  is  to  teach  men  their  condition 
and  state  before  God,  and  to  lead  them  back,  by  the 
discoveries  they  make  of  the  glory,  majesty,  su- 
premacy, holiness,  and  mercy  of  Grod,  to  Him  as 
the  fountain  of  life,  the  only  source  of  permanent 
blessedness.  They  also  reveal  the  fact  that  in  a 
future  state  the  common  relations  and  occupations 
of  the  present  state  shall  have  no  place,  and  yet  it 
is  apparent  in  every  part  of  the  sacred  volume  that 
it  is  designed  to  shed  its  light  upon  every  one  of 


CIVIL  GOVERNMENT.  107 

tiiese  so  long  as  they  are  to  engage  the  attention  of 
men,  and  to  enforce,  even  here,  exclusive  devotion 
of  mind,  heart  and  effort,  to  the  service  of  God. 
It  is  a  plausible  but  very  superficial  view  of  the 
Book  of  God,  and  its  design,  to  imagine  that  it 
slights  the  affairs  of  time,  as  utterly  unworthy  of 
its  regard  in  comparison  with  things  eternaL  The 
truth  is,  the  law — the  revealed  will  and  law  of  God 
— covers  the  entire  existence  of  man,  and  is  in- 
tended to  furnish  all  the  instruction  requisite  for 
the  right  exercise  of  every  faculty,  the  right  use 
of  every  gift,  in  whatever  condition  and  circum- 
stances, man,  the  creature  of  God,  is  placed  by  the 
hand  of  his  Maker,  and  also  to  enforce  its  instruc- 
tion by  the  paramount  authority  of  Him  who  is  the 
^^  only  Potentate/' 

So  far  then  is  it  from  being  true  that  the  Chris- 
tian is  to  disregard  the  movements  of  society,  or 
even  what  relates  to  matters  of  civil  regimen,  and 
human  rights  and  liberty,  that  the  very  opposite  is 
a  truth,  and  a  most  important  one.  The  Christian 
should^  of  all  men,  regard  things  like  these  with  a 
constant  and  active  interest.  So  his  Bible  teaches 
him — for  its  pages  abound  in  directions  bearing  im- 
mediately upon  them.  So  soon  as  he  opens  its 
pages,  his  eye  lights  lipon  some  truth,  law,  maxim, 
warning  or  example,  which  he  may  and  should 
apply  to  the  ordinary  interests  of  time-     Hence, 


108  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

4.  The  Bible  is  the  great  security  of  all  social 
order. — The  Bible,  of  course,  read,  studied,  be- 
lieved, and  made  "the  man  of  our  counsel/^  It 
must  be  so;  for  it  guards  on  the  one  hand,  when 
fairly  interpreted,  the  rights  of  the  individual ;  it 
allows  of  no  tyrannical  exercise  of  power,  forbid- 
ding all  oppression,  and  elevating  every  human 
being  to  his  true  position  of  dignity  and  worth  as 
intelligent  and  immortal;  bringing  all  down  to  the 
same  level  as  guilty  before  God,  and  utterly  alie- 
nated from  Him ;  raising  again  all  the  penitent  and 
the  believing  alike  to  the  highest  place  of  privilege 
and  of  hope.  Consequently  it  abases  pride,  re- 
strains gross  and  vulgar  ambition,  teaches  mutual 
esteem,  and  enjoins  mutual  interest  and  good  offices. 

But  on  the  other  hand,  the  Bible  enforces  with 
its  sanctions  a  due  arrangement,  connexion  and 
subordination  in  human  society.  Ever  maintaining 
the  prerogatives  of  an  enlightened  conscience,  it 
offers  no  toleration  to  the  vicious,  the  malevolent, 
the  disorderly,  the  seditious.  It  not  only  restrains 
them  by  clear  discoveries  of  the  wrath  of  God, 
which  inevitably  attends  and  visits  lawlessness  and 
crime,  but,  in  addition,  arms  lawful  authority  with 
the  right  to  inflict  punishment  proportioned  to  the 
nature  and  circumstances  of  offences  against  social 
order  and  moral  law.  It  establishes  all  just  autho- 
rity; parental,  ecclesiastical  and  civil. 


CIVIL  GOVERNMENT.  109 

These  properties  of  the  Word  of  Grod,  properly 
considered,  enable  ns  to  see  why  it  is  that  tyrants 
fear  it;  that  despotic  governments  oppose  its  free 
circulation.  It  sets  up  a  standard  of  judgment  as 
the  guide  of  human  action  infinitely  above  the 
enactments  of  mere  human  power.  It  divests  man 
of  a  superstitious  and  debasing  reverence  for  arbi- 
trary rule.  It  exalts,  as  to  the  greatest  and  most 
desirable  issues,  the  poorest  and  humblest  to  a  level 
with  the  highest.  It  brings  all  alike  before  the 
same  just  and  impartial  tribunal.  And,  hence,  a 
community  imbued  with  scriptural  knowledge  can 
never  become  the  prey  of  arbitrary  power.  Such 
a  people  will  scorn  and  cast  off  the  yoke  of  ignoble 
bondage.  But  for  the  same  reason,  the  Bible  ever 
imparts  an  unshaken  stability  to  free  and  equitable 
social  and  political  arrangements,  for  it  teaches  men 
their  several  duties,  discloses  to  them  the  beneficent 
ends  of  governmental  institutions,  and  endues 
them  with  the  dispositions  and  sobriety  requisite 
to,  and  that  go  to  make,  a  stable  order  of  society. 
The  free  seek  and  promote,  as  the  best  safeguard 
of  liberty,  the  knowledge  of  that  very  Bible  which 
the  aristocratic  and  selfish  would  put  under  re- 
straint. 

All  history  confirms  these  views,  and  hence  the 
instructive  lesson :  study,  spread,  reverence  the  in- 


110  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

spired  volume,  for  in  it  we  have  this  life,  as  well 
as  life  eternal. 

SECTION  VII. 

OBJECTIONS  ANSWERED. 

Our  interpretation  has  brought  out  very  distinct- 
ly the  principle  that  no  immoral  civil  povjer  can 
demandy  at  least  from  any  of  Paul's  teachings  in 
this  passage,  the  conscientious  allegiance  and  sub- 
jection of  the  citizen.  This  principle  does  not  meet 
with  ready  acceptance.  Many  who  admit,  and 
teach  that  the  obedience  due  to  human  authority 
is  in  every  case  to  be  limited  to  things  in  them- 
selves lawful — that  is,  not  contrary  to  the  law  of 
Grod — do  still  insist  that  even  in  the  case  of  an 
immoral  government — a  government,  for  example, 
that  sanctions  or  practises  oppression,  that  refuses 
to  acknowledge  the  Most  High,  his  law  and  his 
Son,  that  sustains  false  religion,  or  gives  its  influ- 
ence to  corrupt  forms  of  Christianity,  that  winks 
at  and  protects  flagrant  idolatry,  that  is  adminis- 
tered, mainly,  by  ungodly  men;  still  even  such 
a  government  is  to  be  recognised  as  God's,  and 
as  such  to  be  obeyed  for  '^  conscience'  sake.*'  The 
advocates  of  this  principle  are  neither  few  nor  un- 
influential.  They  comprise  a  very  great  majority, 
not  of  the  godless  alone,  who  view  all  things  ir- 


CIVIL  GOVERNMENT.  Ill 

respective  of  their  moral  aspects  and  character,  but 
also  of  the  members  and  ministers  of  the  Christian 
churches.  Indeed,  the  opposite  opinion,  that 
which  we  have  drawn  from  the  passage,  as  at  least 
fairly  implied  in  it,  is  regarded  as  extreme  and  fana- 
tical. To  this,  then,[we  will  direct  some  attention, 
and  will  likewise  endeavour,  in  this  connexion,  to 
vindicate  the  truth  of  our  leading  principle  in  the 
interpretation  of  this  passage. 

It  is,  surely,  rather  an  ungracious  task  for  any 
Christian  to  undertake   to  defend  the   principle 
that  God  recognises  as  exemplifications  of  His  or- 
dinance of  civil  rule,  governments  of  such  a  cha- 
racter as  most  of  those  now  existing  on  earth — to 
teach  that  Christ,  by  his  apostle,  has  enjoined 
obedience  to  civil  powers,  irrespective  of  their  mo- 
ral character — that  whether  a  government  accords 
with  the  divine  institution  of  magistracy,  or  not, 
it  is  to  be  honoured  as  God's — that  the  thunderings 
of  divine  wrath  against  those  who  '^  resist''  autho- 
rity are  directed  equally  against  such  as  refuse  to 
acknowledge   God-forgetting  and  man-oppressing 
authorities,  and  those  who  endeavour  to  overthrow 
or  bring  into  contempt  such  as  are  based  upon  right- 
eousness, and  are  administered  with  equity  and  in  the 
fear  of  God.    Yet  such  expositors  there  are. — And 
1.   Some  assert  that  the  command  to  be  subject  is 


112  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

unrestricted,  and  unlimited.  Says  Haldane,  "Thej 
(Christians)  are  bound  to  obey  not  good  rulers 
only,  as  Dr.  McKnight  unwarrantably  limits  the 
word,  hut  oppressive  riders  also.''  ^'  The  people  of 
Grod  ought  to  consider  resistance  to  the  govern- 
ment under  which  they  live  as  a  very  awful  crimC;, 
even  as  a  resistance  to  Grod  himself  *  The  only 
limitation  he  admits — the  only  excepted  case — is 
when  a  government  commands  a  sinful  act. 

It  is  unnecessary  to  enter  here  upon  a  very 
minute  examination  of  these  singular  assertions. 
The  age  will  not  bear  them.  The  voice  of  suffer- 
ing humanity  is  raised  against  them,  and  true  piety 
revolts  at  such  a  partnership  in  iniquity  and  wrong, 
as  such  a  doctrine  charges  upon  the  Most  High. 
However,  we  remark,  (1.)  If  this  were  true,  then 
Moses  and  the  Israelites  did  an  immense  wrong  in 
setting  themselves  against  Pharaoh  and  his  go- 
vernment. Grod  "raised  up"  Pharaoh.  The  Is- 
raelites had  gone  voluntarily  into  Egypt — and  had 
been  long — for  some  centuries — under  the  Egyptian 
government.  What  then  ?  Did  Grod  send  Moses 
to  excite  a  lawless  sedition?  to  heap  dishonour 
upon  a  government  stamped  with  his  own  authori- 
ty ?  If  not,  then  have  we  a  clear  instance  of  a 
lawful  trampling  under  foot  of  unjust  power — a 

*  Commentary  on  the  passage. 


CIVIL  GOVERNMENT.  113 

righteous  refusal  to  obey  a  government  under  wbich 
the  Israelites  had  been  born  and  reared.  (2.)  This 
writer,  and  he  is  not  alone,  makes  no  distinction 
between  a  government  which  exists  in  God's  pro- 
vidence merely,  and  a  government  which  accords 
with  His  will,  and  answers  the  ends,  in  due  mea- 
sure, of  His  institution  of  magistracy.  Let  Hal- 
dane's  principle  be  universally  applied,  if  applied 
at  all :  let  no  resistance  be  made  to  the  robber,  or  to 
the  midnight  assassin ;  for  the  same  providence  per- 
mits— the  same  providence  is  concerned  in  their  as- 
saults and  bloodthirsty  violence,  as  in  ^^ raising  up" 
a  Pharaoh  or  a  Nero.  (3.)  Such  an  interpreta- 
tion runs  counter,  among  others,  to  the  following 
passage  of  Scripture :  "  Shall  the  throne  of  iniqui- 
ty have  fellowship  with  thee,  which  frameth  mis- 
chief by  a  law?"     (Ps.  xciv.  20.) 

2.  Some  assert  that  the  only  government  that 
may  he  lawfully  resisted  is  one  tyrannical  and  op- 
pressive ;  that  is,  if  a  government  regard  the  com- 
mon rules  of  equity  in  its  laws  and  administration, 
it  is  to  be  obeyed  for  conscience'  sake,  let  its  charac- 
ter otherwise  be  never  so  godless.  On  this  we  re- 
mark, (1.)  lliat  it  admits  the  propriety  of  applying 
some  test  to  existing  institutions.     It  abandons  the 

10 


114  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

principle  of  unquestioning  subjection  to  any  and 
every  existing  institution.  For,  once  admit  that  cha- 
racter is  to  be  looked  after  at  all,  and  we  not  only 
establish  a  new  rule  as  our  guide,  but  we  absolutely 
discard,  ipso  facto,  the  doctrine  that  a  mere  providen- 
tial existence  is  to  be  regarded  in  the  matter.  If  it 
should,  it  avails  the  oppressor  as  well  as  the  benefac- 
tor who  occupies  the  throne  and  holds  the  sceptre  j 
for  the  same  providence,  we  repeat,  has  brought  both 
into  being,  and  invested  them  with  the  functions 
and  insignia  of  power.-  Moreover,  the  admission, 
and  we  believe  it  is  now  generally  made,  is  one  of 
no  little  practical  moment.  By  the  use  of  this 
test,  we  at  once  set  aside  as  God-given  and  re- 
verend, such  governments  as  the  Austrian,  the 
Russian,  the  Tuscan,  the  Neapolitan,  the  Papal 
the  Turkish — and,  in  a  word,  all  the  despotic,  and 
Popish  powers  of  the  old  world  and  the  new.  Nor 
will  the  government  of  this  land  bear  well  this  test. 
A  constitution  that  throws  its  shield  over  the  crime 
of  slave-holding,  which  puts,  to  nearly  all  intents 
and  purposes,  three  millions  of  its  population  out 
of  the  pale  of  its  protection,  surrendering  them  to 
a  bondage  tenfold  more  bitter  than  that  of  Egypt, 
has  need  to  tremble  lest  the  doom  of  the  oppressor 
overwhelm  it.  (2.)  The  objection  overlooks  the  fact 
that  this  passage  describes  a  moral  government. 


CIVIL   GOVERNMENT.  115 

That  the  passage  does  so,  we  have  already  endea- 
Toured  to  show.  It  exhibits  a  magistrate  ruling  as 
God's  minister,  administering  laws  which  coun- 
tenance good  works  and  discourage  the  evil.  It  is 
an  exceedingly  unfair  interpretation  that  would 
present  the  apostle  as  defining  civil  government  as 
concerned  only  about  breaches  of  the  public  peace. 
The  common  sense  of  all  enlightened  communities 
repudiates  such  an  exposition.  Hence  the  encou- 
Tagem^it  given  by  such  to  science ;  the  institution 
and  support  of  schools  and  colleges,  and  kindred 
•efforts  for  the  promotion  of  the  public  intelligence : 
and  direct  efforts  also— as  in  legislation  against  in- 
temperance and  its  causes — in  behalf  of  morals. 
^0  government  among  a  professedly  Christian  peo- 
ple has  jet  been  able  or,  perhaps,  disposed,  to  fall 
into  the  limits  which  m  theory  certain  expounders 
set  around  it 

But  by  what  right  does  any  osae  assert  that  a 
practical  vindication  of  human  rights  is  sufficient  to 
render  a  government  valid,  while  it  utterly  neglects 
the  ackaowledgment  ^i  God  and  of  his  Christ?  or 
if  it  names  Him,  does  so  merely,  or  mainly,  to 
establish  its  own  claims,  while  practically  regardless 
of  Him?  or^  perhaps^  while  professing  to  honour 
Ghrist,  gives  its  sanction  and  aid  to  some  corrupted 
form  oi  Christianity,  or  to  anti-Christ  himself?  or, 


116  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

finally,  which  puts  true  religion  and  false,  Christ 
and  Belial,  on  the  same  level  ?  Surely  that  can- 
not be  ^Hhe  ordinance  of  God,^'  which  gives  to 
Grod  no  such  honour  as  he  claims — nor  that  ruler 
"the  minister  of  God,'^  who  distributes  his  fa- 
vours alike,  in  his  political  regimen,  to  the  faithful 
disciples  of  Christ,  and  the  votaries  of  the  "  Mo- 
ther of  harlots."  And  still  more  plainly,  how 
can  that  government  be  God's,  which  makes  no  re- 
ference to  His  law,  as  of  paramount  authority,  but 
claims  for  itself  absolute  supremacy  ? 

We  must  take  the  character  of  the  government 
into  the  account — its  character  as  here  described — 
in  making  up  our  judgment  upon  this  matter  of 
subjection,  its  limits  and  restrictions.  Gross  in- 
justice has  been  done  the  inspired  writer  by  such 
authors  as  Haldane,  in  neglecting  this  plain  canon 
of  interpretation.  And  here  it  may  be  asked, 
How  can  we  account  for  it  that  the  class  of  expo- , 
sitors  with  whom  we  have  now  to  do,  leave  out,  or 
give  little  weight  to  the  very  circumstance  which 
Paul  himself  adduces  as  a  main  proof  of  the  duty 
of  subjection,  the  equity,  industry,  and  discrimi- 
nating character  of  the  magistracy,  and  introduce 
another — the  will  of  the  people — which  is  not  re- 
ferred to  here  in  words,  at  all  ?  The  only  account 
we  can  give  of  this  most  flagrant  inconsistency  is^ 


CIVIL  GOVERNMENT.  117 

that  advocacy  of  free  government  is  now  popu- 
lar, while  the  law  of  God,  and  the  supremacy 
of  Christ,  are  as  much  hated  as  ever.  In  an  age 
when  human  rights  were  little  heard  of,  none  of 
this  class  of  interpreters  said  any  thing  about  such 
a  limitation.  In  this  age,  when  the  language  of 
men  and  nations  is,  "  We  will  not  have  Christ  to 
reign  over  us,"  the  true  poinU  of  the  passage  is 
slurred  over,  or  misinterpreted.  We  cannot  so 
^^ handle"  the  Word  of  Grod,  It  would  look  too 
much  like  that  '^deceitful  handling"  of  divine 
revelation  which  Paul  repudiates  and  condemns, 
(2  Cor-  'iv.  2.)  That  the  consent  of  the  people 
is  necessary  to  render  a  government  legitimate,  we 
strenuously  maintain;  but  this  passage  makes  no 
reference  to  this  aspect  of  the  question.  It  deals 
with  the  duty  of  subjection,  and  by  a  very  clear 
and  comprehensive  exhibition  of  the  true  nature, 
functions  and  character  of  government,  both  en- 
forces and  limits  the  duty. 

Z.  It  is  objected  that  even  governments^  in  the 
main  had,  still  do  some  good,  and  are  better  than 
none,  and  that,  hence,  they  are  to  he  respected  and 
obeyed.  We  have  already  admitted  that  absolute 
perfection  is  not  to  be  looked  for  in  any  govern- 
ment framed  and  administered  by  human  hands, 
and  that,  of  course,  the  want  of  it  is  not  enough 
10* 


118  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

to  invalidate  the  authority  of  a  magistracy.  Nor 
do  we  attempt  to  draw  a  theoretical  line  of  distinc- 
tion, so  distinct  and  definite,  as  to  rid  the  settle- 
ment of  the  question  regarding  the  validity  of  any 
particular  government  of  all  practical  difficulty. 
It  is  here  as  it  is  in  reference  to  the  Church.  Her 
constitution,  as  it  lies  in  the  Word  of  God,  is 
perfect;  but  defects  still  exist  in  the  best  churches. 
And  it  is  far  from  easy — is  it  possible  ? — to  prepare 
a  minute  statement  of  the  marks  of  a  true  church, 
which  will  render  easy  the  task  of  deciding  in  everyi 
case,  absolutely  and  at  once,  whether  a  society  can 
be  reckoned  a  true  church  or  not.  And  yet  every 
intelligent  Christian  admits  that  a  church,  once 
genuine  in  its  character,  may  become  completely 
apostate.  To  draw  the  line  and  say,  just  here,  it 
ought  to  be  abandoned,  is  not  easy.  The  truth  is, 
all  questions  of  this  sort  must,  as  they  occur,  be 
left  for  decision,  under  the  guidance  of  general 
principles,  such  as  those  to  which  reference  has 
already  been  made  frequently  in  these  pages,  to  the 
enlightened  judgment,  pure  hearts,  and  honest  pur- 
poses of  the  faithful  in  Christ. 

But,  to  come  to  the  objection,  we  remark  : — (1.) 
That  the  objection  proves  much  more  than  the  ob- 
jector would  himself  be  willing  to  admit,*  for  no 

*  We  make  no  reference  here  to  such  expositors  as 
Haldane.     He  would  carry  out  the  objection  to  the 


CIVIL   GOVERNMENT.  119 

government  ever  has,  or  could  exist,  that  did  no 
good  to  any  portion  of  the  community.  The  most 
rampant  tyranny  must  have  its  instruments.  These 
will  have  their  affairs  guarded,  and  their  disputes 
and  controversies  settled,  and,  perhaps,  fairly. 
Even  a  band  of  pirates  cannot  dispense  altogether 
with  justice.  If  the  doing  of  some  good  constitutes 
a  valid  claim  to  allegiance,  then  is  resistance  to 
tyrants,  not  according  to  the  current  maxim,  ^^obe- 
dience to  God,"  but,  ill  every  case,  arrant  and 
damnable  rebellion.  The  objection  proves  too 
much.  Every  friend  of  liberty  rejects  it.  (2.)  It 
takes  for  granted,  which  is  not  true,  that  the  removal 
of  a  bad  government  must  be  succeeded  by  anarchy. 
This  is  impossible — for  any  appreciable  length  of 
time  any  how.  In  every  revolution  provisional 
authorities  are  at  once  established,  and  their  cha- 
racter will  be  determined,  and  their  policy  controlled, 
by  the  character  and  the  object  of  the  revolutionists. 
They  must  organize,  and  one  of  their  first  aims  will 
always  be  to  remove  the  causes  which  gave  rise  to 
a  desire  for  a  change  of  the  government.  Abuses 
may  follow,  as  did  in  the  French  revolution  of 
1789;  but  these  will  find  their  correction;  for  so- 
farthest  extreme.  We  have  in  our  eye  the  great  mass  of 
the  upholders  of  existing  governments,  and  particularly 
that  portion  of  those  with  whom  we  are  in  closer  contact. 


120  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

ciety  cannot  long  remain  unsettled,  nor  will  it  long, 
when  it  has  the  power  in  its  own  hands,  tolerate 
gross  evil  against  its  own  order  and  quiet.  But 
still  more.  That  class  of  citizens,  who  can  alone 
be  regarded  as  wishing  to  remodel  a  godless  govern- 
ment, must  be  guided  by  a  regard  for  God  and  his 
rights.  If  they  should  withdraw  from  an  active 
co-operation  with  existing  institutions,  it  will  be 
mainly  for  the  purpose  of  introducing  Bible  ele- 
ments into  the  aflfairs  of  state.  They  will  not  tole- 
rate anarchy. 

Nor  can  it  be  said,  that  after  all,  so  long  as  the 
government  exists,  its  evils  are  compensated  by  its 
good ;  that  it  still  furnishes  such  a  degree  of  pro- 
tection to  the  citizen  as  to  warrant  and  require  him 
to  own  its  claims.  True,  the  state  of  things  may 
be  such  that  the  immediate  duty  of  the  faithful 
may  be  to  do  no  more  than  withhold  allegiance — 
labouring  in  the  mean  time  to  establish  in  the 
minds  of  all,  governors  and  governed,  sound  prin- 
ciples on  the  subject  of  social  and  political  arrange- 
ments. This  may  even  be  acknowledged  to  be  the 
course  generally  marked  out  for  them  by  God's 
word  and  providence.  But,  surely,  if  the  commu- 
nity can  be  rightly  taught,  and  have  been  taught 
to  understand  their  duty,  and  admit  it,  no  reason 
can  be  given  why  the  requisite  steps  should  not  at 


CIVIL  GOVERNMENT.  121 

once  be  taken  for  making  the  desired  change.     A 
new  order  of  things  may  and  ought  to  arise. 

Hoadly  was  pressed  by  the  same  objection  in  his 
controversy  with  the  advocates  of  ^'passive  obe- 
dience and  non-resistance.^'  He  thus  replies: — 
"There  would  be  some  colour  in  this  objection,  were 
there  no  middle  condition  between  tyranny  and 
anarchy,  or  were  it  impossible  to  oppose  princes 
without  running  into  a  lawless  and  ungovei-ned  con- 
dition. But  I  see  no  necessity  of  any  such  thing. 
And  supposing  that  sometimes  a  people  had, 
(through  the  bad  designs  and  evil  dispositfons  of 
some  men,)  thrown  off  tyranny,  and  run  into  con- 
fusion, or  to  a  tyranny  as  bad  as  the  former,  this  is 
no  reason  why  any  people  should  endure  a  present 
tyranny.  For  this  unhappiness  doth  not  necessarily 
follow,  in  the  nature  of  the  thing,  but  is  purely  ac- 
cidental, and  may,  with  prudence,  be  prevented — 
and  they  must  answer  for  it  who  are  the  causes  of 
it.  This  is  just  as  the  church  of  Rome  would  af- 
frighten  Christians  from  the  most  just  separations, 
by  telling  them  that  any  church  tyranny  is  better 
than  infinite  confusion  and  numberless  separations, 
which  are  seen  to  follow  without  stop,  when  sepa- 
ration on  any  account  is  allowed  of.  If  it  be  said 
here,  as  it  may  be  by  some,  that  any  church  ty- 
ranny is  indeed  better  than  separation,  which  brings 


122  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

confusion  with  it, — but  we  are  not  here  left  at  li- 
berty, for  sinful  terms  are  imposed  upon  us,  and 
we  cannot  enjoy  the  means  of  public  worship  with- 
out complying  actually  in  sin,  and  therefore  there 
is  a  necessity  of  separating,  which  cannot  be  said 
in  the  case  of  resistance.  If  this,  I  say,  be  replied, 
I  answer,  first,  that  we  see  from  hence  that  a  prac- 
tice may  be  lawful,  notwithstanding  that  the  con- 
sequence of  it  may  be  confusion  and  anarchy :  and 
then  what  doth  this  objection,  taken  by  itself,  sig- 
nify towards  the  proving  my  doctrine  false  ?  And 
in  the  next  place  our  separation,  or  reformation, 
with  all  its  consequences,  is  better  than  a  passive 
submission  to  the  exorbitant  power  and  tyranny  of 
the  Church  of  Rome,  even  supposing  no  terms  of 
external  communion  absolutely  sinful  imposed  upon 
us.  For  as  it  is  exercised  in  manifold,  notorious 
and  scandalous  instances,  who  can  prove  submission 
to  it  to  be  so  much  as  lawful?  And  therefore, 
thirdly,  who  can  prove  it  so  much  as  lawful  to  pay 
Buch  a  submission  to  any  mortal  upon  earth,  as 
helps  to  ruin  and  destroy  the  rights  of  others,  which 
we  cannot  honourably  give  up,  though  we  may  our 
own,  the  rights  and  happiness  of  our  neighbours, 
of  all  our  countrymen,  and  of  all  posterity  to  come? 
This  must  be  done  by  other  arguments.  But  the 
making  this  objection  is  only  just,  as  if  one  should 


CIVIL  GOVEENMEKT.  1£3 

say  to  a  man  dying  of  a  fever,  you  may  indeed  be 
cured  of  this  disease  by  some  particular  remedies, 
but  you  had  better  let  it  take  its  course,  for  some- 
times it  hath  been  seen  that  when  they  have  re- 
moved that  distemper  they  have  thrown  the  patient 
into  another  as  bad,  or  Worse,  by  pure  accident, 
and  through  want  of  due  care  and  prudence.  In 
fine,  it  doth  not  in  the  least  follow  that  because  the 
guarding  against  one  evil  hath  sometimes  accident- 
ally, and  without  any  necessity,  brought  on  another, 
therefore  we  may  not,  in  prudence,  defend  our- 
selves against  it,  when  we  may  likewise,  if  we  be 
not  wanting  to  ourselves,  keep  oflf  the  other  also. 
But  were  the  doctrine  I  have  taught  universally 
and  publicly  embraced,  I  am  persuaded  the  ground 
of  all  such  objections  would  be  removed,  because 
the  whole  foundation  of  tyranny  would  be  de- 
stroyed, unless  where  there  is  supposed  a  force  suf- 
ficient to  bear  it  out/'* 

(3.)  If  this  objection  be  true,  no  revolution  could 
ever  occur,  for  surely,  before  any  can  attempt  a  ra- 
dical change  of  government,  and  this  is  the  case 
supposed — they  must  have  previously  become  con- 
vinced that  the  existing  authorities  have  no  claim 
upon  their  conscientious  support.  Take,  as  an  ex- 
ample, the  English  Revolution  of  1688.     Before 

*  Hoadly,  pp.  75,  76,  77. 


124  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

adopting  measures  for  the  expulsion  of  James  II., 
the  leaders  in  that  transaction  must  first  have  seen 
it  to  be  their  duty  to  refuse  him  their  allegiance. 
Had  they  still  regarded  him  as  Grod's  ^'  minister/' 
they  could  not  have  laid  their  plans — with  a  good 
conscience — to  remove  him  from  the  throne.  And^ 
yet,  even  then,  who  can  question  that  James'  go- 
vernment yielded  much  good  to  the  British  nation, 
in  the  way  of  preserving  the  peace,  and  in  guard- 
ing the  private  interests  of  the  people  of  England. 
And,  now,  we  add,  had  this  revolution  failed,  would 
its  abettors  have  become  bound  to  return,  in  heart, 
to  their  allegiance  ?  All  the  reasons  would  still 
have  existed  by  which  they  had  been  fully  satisfied 
that  a  revolution  was  necessary.  Would  they 
have  been  bound  to  discard  their  previous  judg- 
ment? Certainly  not.  Success  or  failure  in  a 
righteous  attempt — and  all  sound  Protestants,  ex- 
cept a  few  Haldanes,  admit  this  to  have  been  a 
righteous  one — does  not  decide  a  question  of  mo- 
rals or  of  religion. 

The  illustration  is  precisely  in  point.  Other 
governments  may  not  be  liable  to  just  the  same 
objections  as  was  the  British  administration;  but 
to  others  equally  valid.  Their  oppression  may  be 
different  in  form — their  relations  to  religion,  and 
treatment  of  the  church  different,  and,  moreover, 


CIVIL  GOVERNMENT.  125 

the  mass  of  the  peojDle  may  go  along  with  them  in 
these  things.  But  what  then  ?  The  question  is, 
Do  they  oppress  knowingly  and  obstinately?  Do 
they  slight  and  dishonour  religion  ?  Do  they  be- 
stow their  favours  upon  any  kind  of  false  religion  ? 
Do  they  disregard  Grod  and  repudiate  the  para- 
mount authority  of  His  Bible?  Are  they  guilty 
of  any  or  of  all  of  these  sins?  If  so^  then,  whe- 
ther they  be  few  or  many,  the  friends  of  liberty,  of 
religion,  and  of  Grod,  should  withhold  from  them 
their  conscientious  obedience;  for  they  are  not  ^' a, 
terror  to  evil  doers,  and  a  praise  to  them  that  do 
well/^  This  cannot  be  denied,  we  repeat,  except 
upon  grounds  that  would  entirely  destroy  the  right 
of  civil  revolution. 

4.  It  IS  affirmed  that  the  tenor  of  scriptural 
example,  and  some  of  the  teachings  of  Christ,  are 
against  our  doctrine.  (1.)  The  principal  examples 
are  those  of  Joseph  and  Daniel  in  accepting  and 
exercising  authority  in  heathen  kingdoms.  On 
these  we  remark,  that  in  their  cases  there  is  every 
reason  to  believe  that  there  was  no  obligation  in- 
curred by  either  of  them  to  conform  to  any  immoral 
law,  and  that  in  their  administration,  the  law  of 
Grod  was  in  fact  made,  so  far  as  their  own  particu- 
lar functions  were  concerned,  the  rule  of  their  ad- 
ministration. They  had  nothing  to  do  with  any 
11 


126  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

thing  but  the  duties  of  their  own  office.  Neither 
directly  or  indirectly  were  they  required  to  concur 
in  the  idolatries  of  those  nations  or  to  sanction  any 
acts  of  oppression.  These  and  similar  cases  are 
thus  disposed  of  by  a  late  writer.* 

"  Any  office  may  be  held,  or  service  engaged  in, 
upon  the  three  following  conditions: 

^^  1st.  That  the  duties  belonging  to  it  be  right 
in  themselves. 

^^  2d.  That  they  be  regulated  by  a  just  law. 

"  3d.  That  there  be  no  other  oath  of  office  re- 
quired, but  faithfully  to  execute  official  duties. 
Let  these  be  the  stipulations,  and  an  office  may  be 
held  under  any  power,  however  immorally  consti- 
tuted, without  a  homologation  of  its  immorality. 

^'Suppose  I  were  in  Algiers,  residing  there  at 
pleasure;  would  my  accepting  an  office  from  the 
Dey,  under  the  regulations  now  specified,  say  a  pro- 
fessorship in  a  university  instituted  by  him,  for 
the  instruction  of  youth,  be  a  homologation  of  his 
immoral  regency — naval  piracy — or  the  blood  and 
murder  upon  which  his  throne  is  erected?  If 
there  as  a  slave,  would  not  the  appointment  be 
still  more  eligible?  This  corresponds  with  the 
situation  of  the  captives  in  Babylon :  it  does  not^ 

*  From  '« Sons  of  Oil,"  by  Sam.  B.  Wylie,  late  of  Phi- 
ladelphia. 


CIVIL  GOVERNMENT.  127 

therefore,  follow,  that  holding  an  office  necessarily 
supposes,  either  that  the  government  be  lawful,  or 
if  not,  that  the  person  holding  the  office  is  impli- 
cated in  the  immorality." 

''If  it  be  pleaded  that  the  monarch's  will  was 
the  constitution,  this,  even  if  admitted,  makes  no 
difference.  The  office  was  either  such  as  required 
allegiance  to  this  constitution,  or  it  did  not.  If 
the  latter,  it  is  the  thing  contended  for,  viz.,  that 
there  was  no  immoral  obligation  connected  with 
his  office.  If  the  former,  he  was  perjured,  not 
only  by  breaking  it  in  several  instances,  but  in 
taking  it  also,  for  he  swore  to  a  blank,  i.  e.,  to 
perform  he  knew  not  what.  But  there  is  no  ac- 
count of  Daniel's  coming  under  any  such  obliga- 
tion. Indeed,  it  would  have  been  inconsistent 
with  the  smiles  of  Heaven,  which  he,  and  others 
in  office,  evidently  enjoyed." 

(2.)  Reference  is  made  to  the  language  and  con- 
duct of  Christ,  Matt.  xvii.  24— 27;  and  Matt, 
xxii.  21.  In  the  former  we  have  an  account  of  the 
paying  of  a  certain  tribute,  and  in  the  latter  we  have 
the  reply  of  Christ  to  an  inquiry  put  by  the 
Pharisees,  when  he  says,  ''Render  to  Caesar  the 
things  that  are  Caesar's."  To  these  we  reply  in 
the  words  of  the  writer  just  quoted. 

^^The  allegation  brought  from  Matt,  xvii.  27,  ia 


128  CIVIL    GOVERNMENT. 

evidently  unfounded.  The  best  commentators  con- 
sider the  tribute  here  mentioned  to  be  temple  money, 
the  ransom  of  the  soul  spoken  of,  Exod.  xxx.  12? 
13.  That  this  was  the  case  will  appear  evident, 
first,  because  the  piece  of  money  found  in  the  fish's 
mouth  is  allowed,  by  the  best  critics,  to  be  equal 
in  value  to  two  half  shekels,  one  for  Christ,  and 
the  other  for  Peter.  And,  secondly,  from  the 
argument  by  which  our  Lord  pleads  exemption, 
namely,  from  the  example  of  the  kings  of  the 
earth.  ^What  thinkest  thou,  Simon?  Of  whom 
do  the  kings  of  the  earth  take  custom  or  tribute? 
Of  their  own  children,  or  of  strangers?  Peter 
saith  unto  him,  Of  strangers.  Jesus  saith  unto 
him,  Then  are  the  children  free.'  Here  we  find, 
by  the  example  of  earthly  kings,  Christ  was  free. 
How  was  he  free  ?  By  being  the  Son  to  the  King 
to  whom  the  tribute  belonged.  Who  was  this 
King?  It  could  not  be  Caesar.  Was  Christ  Cae- 
sar's son?  No.  For  had  he  been  Caesar's  son, 
it  must  have  been  either  by  natural  generation, 
adoption  or  citizenship.  None  of  all  these  was 
the  case.  And  even  though  the  last  had  taken 
place,  which  is  the  only  plausible  supposition, 
(though  false,)  it  would  not  have  procured  this 
immunity,  because  citizenship  did  not  exempt 
from  tribute.     But  Jesus  was  the  Son  of  the  God 


CIVIL  GOVERNMENT.  129 

of  heaven,  that  King  to  whom  this  tribute  be- 
longed; hence  he  says,  'notwithstanding/  that 
is,  though  I  am  free,  by  the  relation  of  Son- 
ship,"  &c. 

"The  other  allegation  brought  from  Matt.  xxii. 
21,  'Render  to  Caesar  the  things  that  are  Caesar's,' 
&c.,  is  equally  unfounded.  It  is  abundantly  evi- 
dent, from  the  passage,  that  the  question  was  in- 
tended to  ensnare  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  answer 
as  he  would.  It  was  proposed  by  the  Herodians 
and  Pharisees;  those,  votaries  for  Roman  domi- 
nation, and  these,  the  sticklers  for  Jewish  immu- 
nities. Had  he  said,  'Grive  it  to  Caesar,'  the  Pha- 
risees, ever  ready  to  accuse  him,  would  have  re- 
presented him  to  the  people  as  an  enemy  to  their 
ancient  privileges.  Had  he  said,  'Don't  give  it,' 
the  Herodians  would  have  represented  him  to 
Herod  as  an  enemy  to  the  government  of  Caesar. 
In  the  fifteenth  verse,  we  are  expressly  told  they 
came  to  him  with  a  view  to  'entangle  him  in 
his  talk.'  But  he,  'knowing  their  craftiness,' 
split  their  dilemma,  and  left  their  question  unde-, 
cided.  He,  on  several  other  occasions,  thus  baf- 
fled his  adversaries;  as  in  John  viii.  4,  12,  in  the 
case  of  the  'woman  taken  in  adultery;'  and  in 
Luke  xii.  14,  when  application  was  made  to  him 
concerning  the  settlement  of  the  earthly  inheri- 
11* 


130  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

tance.  It  is  objected  here,  by  some,  Hhat  this 
explanation  of  our  Saviour's  answer  represents 
the  Lord  as  shunning  to  declare  the  whole  counsel 
of  God — giving  no  answer  in  a  case  respecting  sin 
and  duty.'  The  inference  is  false.  They  were 
not  without  information  on  this  very  subject. 
They  had  the  law  and  the  prophets.  The  Lord 
Jesus  Christ  had  given  specific  directions  concern- 
ing the  character  of  lawful  rulers,  Deut.  xvii.  15, 
to  whom  it  was  lawful  to  pay  tribute  for  con- 
science' sake.  But  it  was  not  information  they 
wanted,  but  to  ensnare  him,  let  him  answer  as  he 
would,  as  has  already  been  shown.  If  silence,  or 
refusing  to  answer  in  every  case,  even  in  matters 
respecting  sin  and  duty,  let  the  design  of  the  que- 
rist be  what  it  will,  be  accounted  criminal,  in 
what  point  of  light  will  the  objector  view  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  when  he  finds  him  actually  refusing 
to  answer  a  question  respecting  sin  and  duty,  in 
the  case  of  his  own  authority?  Mark  xi.  27,  33. 
^Neither  do  I  tell  you  (says  he)  by  what  autho- 
rity I  do  these  things.'  It  would  be  well  if  men 
would  consider  the  awful  consequences  of  some  of 
their  objections  before  they  make  them.  But, 
supposing  that  Christ,  in  both  the  instances  al- 
luded to,  had  commanded  tribute  to  be  paid  to 
Caesar,   what  does   it  prove?      Unless   he   com- 


CIVIL  GOVERNMENT.  131 

Bianded  it  to  be  paid  as  a  tessera  of  loyalty,  it 
proves  no  more  the  morality  of  Caesar's  right, 
than  a  minister  of  the  gospel's  advising  one  of  his 
hearers  to  give  the  robber  part  of  his  property,  to 
secure  the  remainder,  would,  that  the  minister 
considered  the  robber  morally  entitled  to  it/'* 

Hoadly  says,  ^'But  it  is  manifest  that  it  was 
not  his  design  to  tell  his  adversaries,  (whose  en- 
snaring question  was  the  occasion  of  this  precept,) 
what  his  opinion  was  concerning  the  rights  of  the 
emperor,  but  only  to  evade  the  danger  of  such 
an  answer  as  they  hoped  to  have  extorted  from 
him/'t 

(3.)  Paul's  appeal  to  Caasar  has  also  been  ad- 
duced as  importing  an  acknowledgment  of  his  right 
to  rule.  On  this  we  use  again  the  words  of  the 
Sons  of  Oil. 

^'To  this  I  answer,  an  appeal  to  their  tribunals 
no  more  involves  in  it  a  homologation  of  their 
lawful  dominion,  than  an  appeal  from  a  murderer 
to  a  thief,  who  would  be  disposed  to  save  one's 
life,  would  be  a  homologation  of  his  living  ha- 
bitually in  the  breach  of  the  eighth  commandment. 
Suppose,  for  example,  that  the  Allegheny  moun- 
tains were  infested  with  a  banditti  of  robbers,  whose 
captain  retained  still  so  much  humanity  as  to  esta- 
*  >Sous  of  Oil,  pp.  82—84.  f  Hoadly,  p.  120. 


132  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

blish  a  law  that  no  poor  man  should  be  robbed  of 
more  than  ten  dollars — you  happen  to  be  crossing 
the  mountain — five  of  the  gang  approach  you,  and 
rob  you  of  one  hundred,  which  is  nearly  your  all — ■ 
you  meet  with  the  master  of  the  fraternity — you 
know  the  law — and  believe  that  he  still  has  as 
much  humanity  remaining  as  will  induce  him  to 
execute  it.  Will  you  appeal  to  him  to  cause  your 
ninety  dollars  to  be  refunded,  which  are  due  to 
you  by  his  own  law?  If  you  do,  will  this  impli- 
cate you  in  the  immorality  of  the  banditti,  or  be 
saying  Amen  to  their  unlawful  practice?  Cer- 
tainly not.  If  this  hold  in  the  greater,  it  will 
surely  hold  in  the  less.  If  an  appeal  may  be 
made  to  the  captain  of  a  band  of  robbers,  without 
implication  in  his  criminality,  much  more  to  these 
institutions,  which,  though  wrong  in  some  funda- 
mentals, are  yet  aiming  at  the  good  of  civil  so- 
ciety.^ ^* 

5.  It  is  confidently  asserted  that  tlie  Roman 
Christians  must  have  understood  the  Apostle  as 
re/erring  to  the  Roman  government — enjoining 
subjection  to  it.  This  is,  perhaps,  the  prime  ob- 
jection, after  all,  to  the  views  we  have  presented  of 
the  scope  and  bearing  of  this  passage,  and  de- 
serves a  tolerably  minute  examination.     And,  (1.) 

*  Sons  of  Oil,  pp.  81,  82. 


CIVIL  GOVERNMENT.  133 

The  description  here  given  of  the  magistrate  does 
not  correspond  to  that  of  the  reigning  Emperor  of 
Rome,  nor  to  the  character  of  his  administration. 
Nor  are  any  so  ignorant  as  to  be  without  some 
knowledo-e  of  the  character  and  doings  of  Nero 
Csesar — that  he  was  a  human  monster;  a  bloody 
persecutor;  a  tyrant  so  remorseless  that  even 
pagan  Rome  ultimately  dethroned  and  put  him  to 
death.  How  could  it  be  said  by  Paul,  speaking 
of  such  a  man,  ^'That  he  was  a  terror,  not  to  good 
works,  but  to  the  evil?" — "si  minister  of  God  to 
thee  for  good?'^  We  again  quote  Hoadly:  "If 
any  should  say  that  he  speaks  particularly  of  the 
Roman  Emperor  who,  at  this  time,  was  a  very 
bad  man,  I  answer,  if  he  were  such  a  magistrate 
as  did  set  himself  to  destroy  the  happiness  of  the 
people  under  him,  and  to  act  contrary  to  the  end 
of  his  office,  it  is  impossible  that  Paul  should  mean 
him  particularly  in  this  place.  For  the  higher 
powers,  V.  1,  are  the  same  with  the  rulers,  v.  3, 
and  whomsoever  Paul  intended,  he  declares  to  be, 
not  a  terror  to  good  works,  but  to  the  evil.  So 
that  if  the  Roman  Emperor  were  a  terror  to  good 
works,  and  not  to  the  evil,  either  Paul  was  grossly 
mistaken  in  his  opinion  of  him,  or  he  could  not 
be  particularly  meant  here.  If  Paul  intended  to 
press  obedience  to  him,  particularly,  he  manifestly 


134  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

doth  it  upon  the  supposition,  that  he  was  not  a 
terror  to  good  works,  but  to  evil.  And  if  this 
supposition  be  destroyed,  the  reasoning  built  upon 
it  must  fall,  and  all  the  obligation  to  subjection 
that  is  deduced  from  it."* 

(2.)  The  scriptures  clearly  describe  the  Roman 
government  as  despotic,  ungodly  and  bestial.  "Af- 
ter this  I  saw,  in  the  night  visions,  and,  behold,  a 
fourth  beast,  dreadful  and  terrible,  and  strong  ex- 
ceedingly; and  it  had  great  iron  teeth;  it  devoured 
and  brake  in  pieces,  and  stamped  the  residue  with 
the  feet  of  it;  and  it  was  diverse  from  all  beasts 
that  were  before  it;  and  it  had  ten  horns. '^  (Dan. 
vii.  7.)  "And  I  stood  upon  the  sand  of  the  sea, 
and  saw  a  beast  rise  up  out  of  the  sea,  having 
seven  heads  and  ten  horns;  and  upon  his  horns 
ten  crowns;  and  upon  his  heads  the  name  of  blas- 
phemy.'^ (Rev.  xiii.  1.)  All  sound  Protestant 
expositors  unite  in  applying  these  prophecies  to 
the  Roman  Empire.  That  they  should  be  so  ap- 
plied ought  not  to  be  questioned,  Now,  is  it  pos- 
sible that  the  same  Spirit  who  dictated  these  pro- 
phecies, did  also  teach  Paul  to  delineate  this 
savage  beast  of  prey,  "dreadful  and  terrible,"  as 
a  "terror  to  evil  doers,  and  a  praise  to  them  that 
do  well?"  The  thing  is  incredible,  "Doth  a 
*  HoaOly,  p,  48, 


CIVIL  GOVERNMENT.  135 

fountain  send  forth,  at  the  same  hole,  sweet  water 
and  bitter?''  is  the  inquiry  of  an  inspired  writer. 
Does  the  blessed  Spirit  send  forth  teachings  so  dia- 
metrically opposite?  We  cannot  believe  it.  He 
gives  the  true  character  of  this  huge  and  destroy- 
ing power  in  the  book  of  Daniel,  as  it  rages  among 
the  nations — trampling  and  rending  them,  and 
gorging  itself  with  their  blood.  Such  a  power  He 
never  claims  as  His.  The  passage  before  us  can- 
not apply  to  Rome.* 

(3.)  It  cannot,  because  one  part  of  the  mission  of 
the  gospel  was  and  is  to  overthrow  and  utterly  de- 
molish it.  For  this  purpose,  among  others,  Christ 
reigns.  This,  also,  was  long  before  revealed, 
^^And  in  the  days  of  these  kings  shall  the  God 
of  heaven  set  up  a  kingdom  which  shall  never  be 
destroyed ;  and  the  kingdom  shall  not  be  left  to 
other  people,  but  it  shall  break  in  pieces  and 
consume  all  these  kingdoms. '^  (Dan.  ii.  44.) 
^' These," — the  ten  horns — "shall  make  war  with 
the  Lamb,  and  he  shall  overcome  them.''  (Rev. 
xvii.  14.)  But  why  quote  ?  Throughout  the 
whole  prophetic  scriptures — both  Old  Testament 
and  New — this  great,  ungodly,  tyrannical,  perse- 
cuting and  blasphemous  power,  is  presented  as  the 
object  of  divine  wrath,  to  be  consumed,  together 
*  See  Appendix  D. 


136  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

witb  the  "little  horn,"  (Dan.  viii.) — or  the  "two- 
horned  beast/'  (Rev.  xiii.) — by  the  word  and  by 
the  judgment  of  Grod — to  be  consumed  for  its 
iniquities  committed  against  God  and  his  gospel. 
Did  the  Spirit  of  Christ  enjoin  upon  Christians  a 
conscientious  "fear,"  "honour,"  and  obedience,  to 
a  system  against  which  the  Bible  teems  with  the 
weightiest  denunciations  ? 

These  inquiries  assume  a  deeper  meaning  and 
importance,  if  we  remember  that  the  passage  be- 
fore us  enjoins  not  mere  "submission,"  but  a  true 
support  and  co-operation — that  it  is  not  left  op- 
tional to  withhold  these  from  the  "  powers  "  desig- 
nated in  the  text.  Now,  is  it  credible  that  Paul 
intended  to  teach  that  Christians  should  incorpo- 
rate with  the  Roman  Empire  ?  Even  the  "  body 
of  the  beast"  is  to  be  '^ given  to  the  burning 
flame."  (Dan.  vii.  11.)  And,  again,  in  Rev. 
(chap.  xiii.  8,)  it  is  said  that  "  all  that  dwell  on 
the  earth  shall  worship  him  (the  seven-headed  and 
ten-horned  beast)  whose  names  are  not  loritten  in 
the  hoolc  of  life.''  We  cannot  conceive  that  the 
same  God  who  moved  John  thus  to  write,  did,  but 
a  generation  before,  inspire  Paul  to  command 
Christians  to  incorporate  with  this  same  beast 
and  become  constituents  of  his  empire. 

(4.)  We  are  not  without  very  express  testimony 


CIVIL  GOVERNMENT.  13T 

that  the  primitive  Christians  were  not  counte- 
nanced in  doing — were  even  forbidden  to  do  cer- 
tain acts  which  might  be  regarded  as  importing  an 
acknowledgment  of  the  claims  of  Rome.  "  Dare 
any  of  you,"  says  Paul,  (1  Cor.  vi.  1,)  "  having  a 
matter  against  another,  go  to  law  before  the  un- 
just and  not  before  the  saints?"  It  cannot  be  dis- 
puted that  the  settlement  of  pecuniary  matters  and 
disputes,  is  one  of  the  functions  of  civil  govern- 
ment. This  was  contemplated  in  its  institution. 
And  we  cannot  imagine  how  it  could  be  wrong  in 
the  Christian  to  appeal  for  redress  to  any  ordi- 
nance of  God  in  reference  to  such  matters  as  lie 
within  its  own  province.  God  set  up  a  civil  go- 
vernment in  Israel.  Before  its  courts,  Jews  were 
to  implead  one  another.  To  the  civil  tribunals 
they  were  to  bring,  as  their  proper  place,  all  civil 
causes.  When  civil  government  is  purified — and 
it  yet  will  be — all  such  controversies  will  be  set- 
tled by  its  action.  Why  then  does  Paul  forbid 
the  Corinthians  making  such  a  reference  of  their 
personal  afi"airs  to  the  Roman  tribunals  ?  Can  it 
be  accounted  for  on  any  other  principle  than  this  ? 
that  such  proceedings  would,  at  least,  appear  to 
involve  them  in  an  acknowledgment  of  their 
right  to  administer  law  to  Christians,  as  being  to 
them  the  ordinance  of  God.  Moreover,  he  calls 
12 


138  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

the  Roman  magistrates  ^^the  unjust."  Did  he, 
then,  at  one  time,  so  speak  of  them,  and, 
shortly  after,  urge  upon  Christians  a  conscientious 
subjection  to  their  authority  and  maintenance  of 
their  government,  inasmuch  as  they  were  a  ^Her- 
ror  to  evil  doers,  and  a  praise  to  them  that  do 
well  ?''  Assuredly  not.  In  a  word,  Paul  enjoins 
upon  the  Corinthians  to  withhold  from  the  tri- 
bunals of  the  Roman  empire  a  part  of  that 
^' honour'^  which  certainly  belongs  to  all  recog- 
nised governments;  and,  in  so  doing,  establishes 
a  principle  that  would  operate,  with  no  little 
power,  in  keeping  them  and  the  Christians  sepa- 
rate from  the  community  in  which  they  lived — 
that  would  remind  them  that  while  w,  they  were 
not  o/,  the  Roman  State. 

Now,  much  of  all  this  that  we  have  adduced  in 
the  last  few  pages,  was  before  the  minds  of  the 
Romans.  They  knew  that  Daniel  had  described 
that  government  as  bestial — they  had  heard,  no 
doubt,  of  the  directions  given  to  the  Christians  of 
Corinth— they  understood,  and  to  this  we  particu- 
larly refer,  that  the  Roman  Emperor  and  govern- 
ment were  idolatrous  and  oppressive — that  the 
gospel  was  preached,  often  at  the  hazard  of  life, 
and  that  its  profession  even  was  extensively  dis- 
countenanced.    How   would   they,   then,   under- 


CIVIL   GOVERNMENT.  139 

stand  this  chapter?  We  put,  in  reply,  another 
interrogatory.  How  would  the  inhabitants  of 
Papal  Rome — the  city  itself — now  understand  the 
very  same  teachings  ?  We  address  them :  ^'  Breth- 
ren— be  subject  to  the  higher  powers.  They  are 
the  ministers  of  God  to  thee  for  good.  They  are 
a  terror  to  evil  doers,  and  a  praise  to  them  that 
do  well.  Do  that  which  is  good,  and  thou  shalt 
have  praise  of  the  same."  What  would  they  say? 
We  can  easily  imagine  their  countenances,  at  first 
marked  with  some  astonishment.  ^^Can  this  be 
our  government  ?  No !  it  cannot.  Are  not  our 
friends — the  friends  of  the  Bible — banished  or 
executed?  Are  we  not  deprived  of  our  liberties? 
Have  we  not  seen  deeds — do  we  not  witness  them 
almost  daily — of  the  grossest  oppression?  Are  not 
evir doers  in  high  places?  Are  not  the  God-fear- 
ing regarded  with  jealousy?  Is  not  the  Bible — 
God's  own  book — a  forbidden  volume?  Is  not 
the  gospel  hated  and  opposed,  and  idolatry  pub- 
licly practised  and  protected  ?  No.  It  cannot  be 
that  Pius  IX.  and  his  ghostly  government  arc 
here  described,  and  that  we  are  commanded,  on 
pain  of  damnation,  to  support,  fear  and  honour 
them." 

To  what  conclusions  would  intelligent  minds 
come?      Why,  certainly,  to  this,  that,  whatever 


140  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

tke  import  of  the  passage,  it  could  not  apply  to 
their  governors.  So  would  a  godly  Austrian — so 
a  Hungarian — so  a  Spaniard — so  a  slave  in  the 
United  States.     Hence  we  add — 

(5.)  To  apply  this  to  the  Roman  government  is 
to  dishonour  religion.  It  is  time  that  religion — 
the  true  religion — was  rid  of  this  reproach.  It  is 
doing  no  little  evil-  Convince  men  that  any  go- 
vernment that  happens  to  exist,  whatever  its  cha- 
racter, is  to  be  obeyed,  honoured  and  reverenced; 
we  mean  that  the  Bible  enjoins  this,  and  you 
have  struck  a  very  heavy  blow  at  the  Bible  itself. 
Men — if  they  believe  in  God  at  all — cannot  be- 
lieve He  is  the  patron  of  iniquity  and  wrong. 
And,  hence,  they  will  refuse  to  recognise  the 
claims  of  any  book  that  professes  to  come  from 
Ood,  and  yet  so  represents  him. 

But  of  what  use,  then,  was  this  passage?  Why 
did  it  find  a  place  in  this  epistle?  Why  in  the 
volume  of  inspiration  at  all?  We  answer:  [1.] 
That  it  was  designed  to  show  that  civil  government 
IS  not,  as  an  institution,  abolished  by  the  advent 
of  the  Messiah  and  the  setting  up  of  his  kingdom 
among  Grentile  nations.  In  other  words,  that 
the  ecclesiastical  was  not  the  only  social  power — 
that  civil  society  was  not  to  be  absorbed  by  the 
church.     It  was  important  to  state  this  distinctly; 


CIVIL   GOVERNMENT.  141 

for  there  has  ever  been  a  tendency  developed,  in 
connexion  with  every  great  religious  movement, 
to  depreciate  the  institution  of  magistracy — to  re- 
gard it  as  beneath  the  Christian  to  pay  any  respect 
to  political  regimen,  or,  in  any  circumstances,  to 
take  a  part  in  managing  civil  aiFairs,  except  so 
far  as  they  may  be  connected  with  the  government 
of  the  church.  This  spirit  was,  unquestionably, 
developed  in  the  church  at  a  very  early  period. 
It  made  its  appearance  during  the  Reformation  in 
Grermany,  in  Holland,  and  in  England.  It  is 
sometimes  seen  among  the  quite  intelligent  now, 
who  suppress,  in  their  own  minds,  all  interest  in 
political  movements,  not  so  much  from  conviction 
respecting  their  practical  or  doctrinal  corruptions, 
as  from  a  mistaken  notion  that  they  are  not  spi- 
ritual enough  at  least  for  the  devout  and  godly. 

Every  disposition  of  this  sort  is  rebuked  by  this 
passage.  It  stands  with  a  few  parallel  passages; 
and  has  stood  ever,  as  an  impregnable  bulwark 
against  such  delusive  notions. 

[2.]  It  furnished  then,  as  now,  a  standard  by 
which  to  try  existing  governments.  That  it  was 
not  intended  to  induce  them  to  "  honour" — and 
reverence  and  sustain,  the  imperial  authority  of 
Nero,  we  have  already  endeavoured  to  show.  They 
could  not  so  understand  it.  At  first,  they  might 
12* 


142  CIVIL   GOVERNMENT. 

be  somewhat  surprised — but  soon — upon  a  little 
reflection,  they  would  see  that  in  these  verses  the 
Apostle  had  really  furnished  a  very  clear  mirror  in 
which  they  could  see,  by  contrast,  the  hideous 
features  of  the  "  beastly '^  power  of  Rome.  It  is 
of  use  in  this  way  still.  The  lineal  descendants  of 
the  ancient  Italians,  who  cannot  discern  in  their" 
own  rulers,  as  we  have  seen,  any  traces  of  the  be- 
neficent power  here  described,  may  learn  most  im- 
portant lessons.  They  may  find  that  governments, 
whatever  claim  of  divine  right  they  set  up,  are  not 
above  the  examination  of  the  Christian  citizen — • 
and,  more  than  this,  here  are  the  very  tests  to 
apply. 

[3.]  It  presented  then,  and  does  now,  the  specific 
ends  which  the  godly  should  seek  to  attain  in  their 
reforming  efi"orts.  It  has  been  already  hinted  that 
the  word  of  God,  the  gospel  of  Christ,  is  intended 
to  overthrow  immoral  and  despotic  power.  It  will 
do  more  :  it  will  accomplish  a  complete  reforma- 
tion; and  this  by  the  instrumentality  of  well  in- 
structed and  faithful  men,  who  labour  with  an 
intelligent  eye  to  a  fixed  and  definite  end.  This 
end  they  find  here.  Not  only  here,  for  it  appears 
elsewhere  in  the  inspired  record ;  but  here  stated 
with  singular  definiteness,  distinctness  and  brevity. 
Setting  this  before  them,  the  friends  of  Christ  and 


CIVIL  GOVERNMENT.  143 

of  the  welfare  of  man  are  engaged  in  no  aimless 
work.  Their  toils  in  this  department  of  their 
efforts  have  this  as  their  object — the  ultimate  estab- 
lishment of  governmental  authority  that  shall 
honour  God  and  religion,  shall  enact  just  laws, 
protecting  the  poor,  and  restraining  all  wrong,  and 
that  shall  seek  as  their  highest  aim  to  advance  the 
name  and  glory  of  Christ- 

[4-]  The  Christians  in  Rome  would  find  here 
ample  reason  for  the  study  of  quietness  and  pa- 
tience and  the  sedulous  discharge  of  all  the  com- 
mon duties  of  life ;  for  here  is  seen,  with  the 
utmost  clearness,  the  importance  of  civil  society, 
and  the  imperative  character  of  social  duties.  Here 
the  fact  is  presented  in  the  boldest  relief,  that  the 
commission  of  crime,  the  unnecessary  disturbance 
of  the  peace  of  the  community,  such  conduct  as 
denominates  one  a  "bad  citizen,"  whether  in  the 
narrower  or  the  wider  sense  of  the  phrase,  is  de- 
serving of  ^^  wrath;"  that  the  practice  of  the 
Christian  virtues — what  these  are  we  learn  else- 
where— meets  with  commendation;  is  pleasing  to 
Ood. 

Hence,  it  may  be  added,  the  wise  student  of 
Kom.  xiiL  1 — 7,  will  rise  from  his  investigations 
deeply  impressed  on  the  one  hand  with  the  wide 
departures   from  its  high  standard  which   have 


144  CIVIL    GOVERNMENT. 

characterized  and  do  yet  characterize,  the  kingdoms 
of  this  world,  and,  of  course,  with  a  confirmed  de- 
termination to  refuse  them  his  active  support,  hut, 
on  the  other  hand,  with  a  profound  and  salutary 
conviction  of  the  excellence  of  the  institution  of 
government,  and  the  weighty  responsibilities  that 
rest  upon  the  Christian  as  he  sustains  many  rela- 
tions to  society  around  him.  He  will  thus  be 
guarded  against  a  spirit  of  sedition  or  lawlessness, 
and  imbued  with  a  disposition  to  attend  to  the  re- 
quirements of  duty  in  his  own  particular  sphere, 
so  that  while  he  may  exemplify  the  faithfulness  of 
the  witness  for  Christ,  he  may  still  ^'  lead  a  quiet 
and  peaceable  life  in  all  godliness  and  honesty." 
(1  Tim.  ii.  2.) 

[5.]  There  is  not  wanting  evidence  that  the 
primitive  Christians  did  gather  at  least  much  of 
this  sort  of  instruction  from  these  teachings  of 
Paul.  We  once  more  quote  Hoadly:  "It  is  very 
remarkable  that  Origen,  (the  same  person  who 
challenges  Celsus,  that  great  enemy  to  Christians, 
to  name  any  sedition,  or  tumult  in  which  the 
Christians  were  concerned,)  is  by  some  alleged  for 
this  in  defence  of  passive  obedience;  that  he,  (I 
say,)  should  mention  that  celebrated  passage  of 
Paul,  (Rom.  xiii.  1,)  upon  which  some  have  built 
so  much,  with  such  a  remark  as  would  incline  one 


CIVIL  GOVERNMENT.  145 

to  think  that  all  the  primitive  Christians  did  not 
see  any  such  unlimited  non-resistance  in  it  as  many 
have  done  since.  The  passage  I  mean  is  towards 
the  end  of  his  eighth  book  against  Celsus,  where 
he  takes  occasion  to  cite  this  place  of  Paul,  to  show 
the  adversaries  of  Christianity  what  notions  Chris- 
tians had  concerning  princes,  and  the  subjection 
due  to  them.  But  he  immediately  adds  that  there 
were  many  questions  and  disquisitions  about  the 
meaning  of  this  place  of  Scripture,  arising  from  the 
consideration  of  the  cruelty  and  tyranny  of  many 
princes  j  and  that  upon  that  account  he  would  not 
at  present  undertake  to  give  an  exact  account  of  it. 
From  whence  I  think  it  manifest,  not  only  that 
many  of  the  first  Christians  doubted  whether  the 
subjection  preached  by  Paul  was  due,  in  point  of 
conscience,  to  tyrants  and  oppressors;  but  also  that 
Origen  himself,  when  he  wrote  this,  did  not  believe 
it  to  be  so.  For  if  he  did,  he  had  now  the  fairest 
occasion  for  declaring  it;  and  he  could  not  more 
effectually  have  defended  the  Christians  from  the 
objections  now  before  him,  than  by  saying  so."* 

This  passage  was  far  from  useless  to  the  Romans, 
though  it  did  not  teach  them  conscientious  obe- 
dience to  a  rampant  savage  power.    It  taught  them 

*  Hoadly,  p.  139. 


146  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

better  things,  more  becoming  Christians.     To  us 
it  brings  the  same  lessons. 

6.  It  may  be  objected  that   to  withhold   alle- 
giance from  ungodly  governments  is  not  practicable 
— that  lands  must  be  held — taxes  paid — the  laws 
appealed  to  for  redress.     We  reply^  (1.)  That  pro- 
perty is  not  held  of  the   state.     The  state — the 
nation — does  not  give  the  title.    Or  if  it  be  in  any 
case  original  proprietor,  the  purchase  of  land  from 
the  state  no  more  implies  a  recognition  of  its  other 
claims  than  the  purchase  of  property  from  an  in- 
dividual recognises  all  his  acts,  and  endorses  his 
character.     (2.)  Taxes  may  be  paid,  either  on  busi- 
ness principles  merely,  for  work  done,  or  for  the 
reason  that  if  they  be  not  paid,  they  will  be  taken. 
Circumstances  may  occur  making  it  an  imperative 
duty  to  refuse  the  payment  of  taxes  at  all  hazards, 
but  ordinarily  this  would  be  unwise  because  in- 
effectual, and  would  answer  no  end  that  cannot,  at 
least  as  well,  be  otherwise  obtained.    (3.)  The  courts 
may  be  appealed  to  on  principles  already  stated 
and  vindicated.*  (4.)  "We  reply,  in  general,  to  every 
objection  of  this  sort,  that  we  must  distinguish  be- 
tween  things   that   belong   merely  to  matters  of 
social  neighbourhood  and  arrangement,  and  things 
governmental;  that  there  is  a  vast  difference  be- 

*  See  p.  131. 


CIVIL  GOVERNMENT.  147 

tween  men's  availing  themselves  merely  of  natural 
rightSj  and  taking  an  active  and,  of  course,  volun- 
tary part  in  affairs  of  state.  And,  finally,  that  all 
these  acts,  which  are  comprehended  in  this  class  of 
objections,  are  acts  which  aliens  may  do,  and  pri- 
vileges used  such  as  aliens  enjoy,  and  yet  no  one 
imagines  that  the  alien  becomes,  by  such  acts  as 
buying  lands,  &c.,  a  corporate  member  of  the  body 
politic. 

Our  principle  will  stand  the  most  rigid  investi- 
gation— it  demands  the  closest  examination.  For 
it  is  a  matter  of  no  small  moment  to  ascertain  well 
that  we  do  not  so  identify  ourselves  with  institu- 
tions which  dishonour  Grod  and  oppress  man,  as  to 
involve  ourselves  in  their  guilt  and  punishment,  or 
weaken  our  own  hands  in  the  efforts  we  may  be 
disposed  to  make  for  their  reformation. 

CONCLUSION* 

And  1.  There  is  no  stick  sacredness  about  civil 
governments  as  to  exemjpt  them  from  the  closest 
scrutiny  in  their  constitution  and  workings.  The 
time  was  when  it  would  have  been  necessary  to 
dwell  largely  upon  this  statement.  The  occupants 
of  power  are  always  disposed  to  claim  an  unin- 
quiring  recognition,  as  well  as  an  unresisting  obe- 


148  CIVIL  GOVERNMEl^rr, 

dience.  Kings  and  emperors  bave  been  addressed 
by  'the  title  of  "sacred  majesty/^  They  have 
claimed  a  "divine  right '^  to  reign.  They  are  kings 
"by  the  grace  of  God/'  They  are  to  rule  and  the 
people  to  submit^  pay  taxes^  and  bear  all  the 
burdens.  This  was  once  the  theory.  Some  changes 
have,  indeed,  passed  over  society  in  many  Christian 
countries.  Men  do  not  now  yield  so  readily  a  blind 
and  superstitious  obedience.  But,  after  all,  the 
principle  is  not  yet  fully  recognised  that^  like 
every  thing  else  in  human  hands,  the  affairs  of  go- 
vernment are,  in  every  aspect,  open  to  be  ques- 
tioned and  tried.  Even  in  this  land,  with  all  its 
licentiousness  of  opinion  and  even  contempt  of  au- 
thority, there  is  yet  not  a  little  of  the  old  leaven. 
Not  a  few  still  appear  to  regard  the  constitution^ 
and  even  some  enactments,  and  these  the  worst  of 
them,  as  possessing  a  sort  of  extraordinary  sacred- 
ness. 

For  all  this  there  is  no  reason.  The  Church  is^ 
surely,  as  sacred  as  the  state,  and  yet  what  friend 
of  religious  liberty  denies  the  right  of  the  Lord^s 
freeman  to  bring  her  claims  to  the  proof — to  try 
her  proceedings  ?  It  is  one  of  the  hateful  pecu- 
liarities of  the  great  Apostacy,  to  demand  an  unin- 
quiring  subjugation  of  the  understanding  and  con- 
science to  its  arrogant  demand  of  implicit  recogni- 


CIVIL   GOVERNMENT.  149 

tion  and  obedience.  The  faithful  repudiate  the 
claim.  They  have  ever  insisted  that  to  admit  it 
would  be  treason  against  Christ. 

Nor  in  divesting  government  of  this  hind  of 
sacredness  do  we  furnish  any  opening  for  either  li- 
centiousness or  sedition.  The  standard — the  chief 
standard — of  judgment  here,  as  in  all  other  mat- 
ters where  morals  are  concerned,  is  the  Word  of 
God.  We  do  not  reject  reason  altogether.  But 
reason  itself  must  be  proved  by  the  same  word. 
And  it  has  been  previously  observed  that  when  the 
Holy  Scriptures  are  conscientiously  regarded  and 
justly  applied,  the  result  will  be,  on  the  one  hand, 
the  rejection  of  what  God  does  not  approve,  and  on 
the  other  hand,  the  intelligent  and  hearty  subjec- 
tion of  the  whole  man  to  what  accords  with  the 
divine  will.  And  can  it  be  considered  as  any  thing 
short  of  an  infidel  contempt  of  the  Bible  to  assert 
that  to  use  it  for  this  purpose  is  either  wrong  or 
dangerous  to  the  peace  and  order  of  society  ? 

II.  Tried  hy  this  su/preme  rule,  the  government 
of  this  land  cannot  claim  conscientious  obedience.. 
It  has,  indeed,  been  set  up  by  the  action,  and,  of 
course,  exists  by  the  voice  of  the  majority  of  the 
people.  But  this  is  not  the  only  test.  The  peoplfe 
may  be  wrong  now,  as  well  as  of  old,  when  the  ten 
tribes  "set  up  kings,  but  not  by'^  God,  "and  princes, 
13 


150  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

and  he  knew  (approved)  it  not/^  (Hosea  vii.  Of 
4.)  That  this  has  been  done  in  these  states  is  evi- 
dent because  the  paramount  authority  of  the  Most 
High;,  speaking  in  his  word,  is  not  recognised  in 
the  constitution — the  fundamental  law  of  the  gene- 
ral government;  because  Christ  is  not,  in  any  sense, 
acknowledged  in  his  character  as  "  Prince  of  the 
kings  of  the  earth/^  (Rev.  i.  3;)  because  the  Bible 
is  not  received  as  law,  obligatory  and  supreme;  be- 
cause no  barrier  has  been  enacted  against  the  in- 
duction of  God's  enemies  into  places  of  power — of 
trust;  because  the  same  securities  are  thrown  around 
the  idolatries  of  Popery,  as  around  the  practice  and 
observances  of  the  true  religion;  because  oppressiort 
is  sanctioned,  and  th«  oppressor  protected  in  the 
enjoyment  of  his  despotic  and  unfounded  claim. — 
In  this  last  we  refer,  of  course,  to  slavery,  which 
is  numbered  among  the  "institutions''  of  nearly 
one-half  of  the  states,  and  the  constitution  gives  the 
same  protection  to  this  institution  as  to  any  others. 
It  does  more.  It  provides  specific  and  peculiar  means 
for  the  arrest  of  the  fugitive;  or,  perhaps,  more 
accurately,  it  contains  provisions,  which  may  be 
made,  and  have  been,  the  basis  of  distinct  legisla- 
tion on  this  subject.* 

*  Appendix  E, 


CIVIL  GOVERNMENT.  151 

Now,  let  it  be  remembered,  that  to  constitute  an 
oppressive  and  tyrannical  government,  it  is  not  re- 
quisite that  the  subjects  of  the  violence  and  wrong 
be  white  men :  it  is  enough  if  they  be  men — nor 
that  they  be  the  majority,  kept  under  by  a  well 
situated  and  armed  minority,  as  in  Italy  or  Aus- 
tria. Any  institutions  are  chargeable  with  the  sin 
and  crime  of  despotism,  that  wilfully  deprive  any 
class  of  their  citizens  of  their  natural  rights,  or 
sanction  it  when  done.  This  is  the  case  here.  The 
constitution  treats  as  outcasts  from  its  pale  a  large 
proportion  of  the  inhabitants  of  the  country,  more 
than  three  millions  out  of  twenty-four.  Hence,  it 
is  not  only  wrong  and  sinful  to  swear  to  maintain 
the  constitution:  we  go  farther,  and  affirm  that 
such  a  government  is  not  to  be  "honoured^^  as 
God's  moral  ordinance;  it  is  not, — as  it  respects  a 
host  within  its  limits,  and  these  belonging  to  that 
very  class,  the  poor  and  needy,  for  whose  protec- 
tion civil  government  was  eminently  designed — a 
^^minister  of  Grod  for  good,''  but  a  minister  o 
evil.  To  such  a  government  the  apostle  has  here 
no  reference  in  his  injunctions  of  obedience.  It 
does  not  possess  the  features  here  required.  It  pos- 
sesses some  that  are  here,  by  implication,  strongly 
condemned. 

We  are  aware  that  it  is  no  easy  task  to  persuade 


152  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT. 

men — even  intelligent  men — tliat  this  is  a  matter 
in  which  they  have  a  deep,  personal,  and  responsi- 
ble interest.  The  evil  of  corrupt  government  is 
one  so  nearly  universal  and  of  so  long  standing — 
the  notion  is  so  prevalent  that  if  there  is  any  thing 
wrong,  it  is  not  their  concern;  and  the  obstacles  are 
often  so  many  and  so  great  in  the  way  of  a  complete 
withdrawing  from  an  active  share  in  affairs  of 
state ;  and,  finally,  it  is  so  easy  to  lull  the  conscience 
))y  the  delusive  idea  that  the  best  way  to  reform  a 
government  is  first  to  swear  to  support  it,  and  to 
take  a  part  in  its  operations.  In  view  of  all  these 
considerations,  it  is  a  matter  of  labour  and  of  ef- 
fort, and  cannot  be  accomplished  unless  the  Spirit 
of  Grod  imparts  clear  and  spiritual  vision,  and  gives 
a  decided  and  resolute  will.* 

III.  Such  as  do  take  this  step  are  called  to  a 
position  of  peculiar  difficulty. — On  the  one  hand 
they  are  to  watch  against  doing  any  thing  really 
inconsistent  with  the  place  which  they  have  de- 
liberately occupied — apart  from  the  governmental 
machinery;  at  the  same  time  testifying  with  can- 
dour and  faithfulness  against  existing  wrong 
— and  yet,  on  the  other  hand,  they  need  to  be 
equally  watchful  lest  they  be  tempted  to  despise 

*  See  Appendix  C. 


CIVIL  GOVERNMENT.  153 

oven  the  institution  of  government,  become  regard- 
less of  the  welfare  of  the  land,  or  in  any  way  dis- 
orderly in  their  deportment.  It  is  especially  re- 
quired of  them  that  ^'they  follow  every  good  work/^ 
and  thus  by  a  pure  and  peaceable  behaviour  as  in- 
dividuals, and  by  the  exemplariness  of  their  de- 
portment in  social  life,  commend  to  all  men  the 
excellence  of  a  full  and  faithful  profession  of  the 
name  of  Christ,  or  at  least,  that  '^by  well  doing, 
they  may  put  to  silence  the  ignorance  of  foolish 
men.'^ 

IV.  The  doctrines  of  this  passage  and  the  colla- 
teral principles  to  which  we  have  referred,  willcer- 
tainly  yet  prevail  on  earth. — The  very  fact  that 
Paul  was  inspired  of  God  to  give  such  a  view  of 
civil  authority  is  a  guarantee  that  it  shall  yet  re- 
ceive a  just  exemplification.  However  this  may 
be,  other  scriptures  are  more  explicit.  "The  king- 
dom and  dominion,  and  the  greatness  of  the  king- 
dom under  the  whole  heaven,  shall  be  given  to 
the  saints  of  the  Most  High.^'  (Dan.vii.27.)  "The 
kings  of  Tarshish  and  of  the  isles  shall  bring  pre- 
sents :  the  kings  of  Sheba  and  Seba  shall  offer  gifts. 
Yea,  all  kings  shall  fall  down  before  him;  all  na- 
tions shall  serve  him.  For  he  shall  deliver  the 
needy  when  he  crieth;  the  poor  also,  and  him  that 
hath  no  helper.  He  shall  spare  the  poor  and 
13* 


154  CIVIL  GOVERNMENT, 

needy;  and  shall  save  the  souls  of  the  needy.  He 
shall  redeem  their  souls  from  deceit  and  violence : 
and  precious  shall  their  blood  be  in  his  sight."  (Ps, 
Ixxii.  10 — 14.)  "And  kings  shall  be  thy  nursing 
fathers^  and  their  queens  thy  nursing  mothers." 
(Is.  xlix.  23.)  "Blessed  and  holy  is  he  that  hath 
part  in  the  first  resurrection :  on  such  the  second 
death  hath  no  power^  but  they  shall  be  priests  of 
God  and  of  Christ,  and  shall  reign  with  him  a  thou- 
sand years."  (Rev.  xx.  6.)  The  apostle  John  thus 
describes  the  ultimate  issue  of  the  vast  changes  in 
reference  to  things  religious,  political,  and  social, 
in  the  following  most  expressive  and  emphatic  lan- 
guage: "The  kingdoms  of  this  world  are  become 
the  kingdoms  of  our  Lord  and  of  his  Christ,  and 
he  shall  reign  for  ever  and  ever."  (Rev.  xi.  15.) 
Even  so  come,  Lord  Jesus- 


AtPIlNDiX. 


A.— Page  17. 


The  word  "e^ovtrtet^'  has  been  a  good  deal  lil- 
sisted  upon  as  denoting  a  power  lawful  before 
God.  It  is  derived  from  the  verb  "  £|£<rr<"— "it 
is  lawful.'^  Still,  we  would  not  insist  upon  this 
so  far  as  to  lay  any  great  stress  upon  it  in  argu- 
ment. It  is  not  necessary  to  do  so;  and,  more- 
over, the  term  is  used  in  Rev^  xiii.  3,  to  express 
the  "authority"  of  the  beasrt  of  the  sea* 

B.— Page  18. 

On  the  word  "y;rf/)e;^;fiuc-«;$''  more  stress  may 
be,  perhaps,  laid.  The  following  is  from  a  lecture 
on  the  Revelation,  by  Murrai/,  of  Newcastle^  Eng^ 
land  :-- 

•'There  is  a  passage,  which  has  been  much  im- 
proved by  those  that  imagine  that  believers  of  the 
13t 


156  APPEJ^BlX. 

Gospel  are,  by  the  Apostle,  enjoined  to  yield  a  passive 
obedience^  and  that  is  in  Romans  xiii.  1,  which  ver- 
sion reads,  ^Let  every  soul  be  subject  to  the  higher 
powers,'  &c.,  to  the  beginning  of  the  seventh  verse. 
With  all  due  respect  to  our  translators,  and  other 
learned  men,  I  will  affirm  that  this  is  rather  a  para- 
phrase of  the  translators,  than  a  translation  of  the  text. 
From  the  very  genius  of  the  Greek  language,  it  is 
manifest  that  s^ovaiat,?  t'rt£ps;^0D(jat?  do  not  signify  all 
sorts  of  authority,  but  only  such  as  protect  men  in  the 
enjoyment  of  their  just  rights  and  privileges:  and 
these  words  ought  to  be  read  literally,  protecting  au- 
thoritieSj  or  excellent  authorities.  Eloroca,  in  its  first  sig- 
nification, signifies  yu5i  and  lawful  poiver  or  authority, 
and  can  never  be  applied  to  tyrants  and  oppressors 
without  abuse :  vrtapsx^  signifies  to  protect,  or  to  be 
eminent,  and  is  here  understood  in  that  sense,  as  in 
other  Greek  authors.  Homer  makes  use  of  this  word 
in  this  sense,  when  he  describes  Agamemnon  address- 
ing the  Greeks,  when  the  Trojans  were  advancing 
against  them,  (Iliad,  iv.  1.  249.) — ^Will  ye  tarry,' 
says  he,  ^till  the  Trojans  advance,  to  know  whether 
Jupiter  will  protect  you?'  0<fpa  iSnr  aix  vfjciv  v7ripcrx» 
Xiipa  K/)ovt(ov.  This  Apostle  makes  use  of  this  word, 
(Phil.  iv.  7,)  to  point  out  the  excellency  of  the  peace 
of  God.  Kat  eipr^vrj  Tfov  Qsov  vj  v7t£pf;tov(ya  rtavta  vovif ', 
and  the  peace  of^  God  which,  passeth  all  understanding,  shall 
keep  your  hearts.''  This  same  Apostle,  in  the  second 
chapter  of  this  Epistle,  makes  use  of  the  same  word 
to  signify  excellency,  or  what  is  more  excellent,  or 


APPENDIX.  157 

better;  a7JKti'Kov;  vjyovfiivoi  u;tfpf;KovT'af,  'let  each  esteem 
others  better  than  themselves.^  It  does  not  appear  from 
this  passage  that  there  is  any  command  to  be  subject 
to  any  powers,  except  such  as  excel,  and  protect 
their  subjects,*' 


C— Page  46. 

Murray  takes  the  same  view  that  we  have  done 
of  this  passage.     He  says : — 

'•But  let  us  read  the  whole  paragraph,  with- 
out any  paraphrase  in  the  translation,  and  see  how 
it  will  prove  non-resistance.  'Let  every  soul  be 
subordinate  to  the  authorities  protecting  them;  for 
it  is  not  authority,  if  not  from  God.  But  these  that 
are  authorities  under  God,  are  appointed.  There- 
fore, he  that  resisteth  the  authority  resisteth  the 
appointment  of  God,  and  they  that  resist  shall  re- 
ceive judgment  to  themselves.  For  rulers  are  not  a 
terror  of  good  works,  but  of  evil.  Will  you  not  fear 
authority  ?  do  good,  and  you  shall  have  praise  from 
it ;  for  he  is  the  servant  of  God  for  good.  But  if  you- 
do  evil,  fear,  for  he  beareth  not  the  sword  in  vain; 
for  he  is  the  servant  of  God,  a  revenger  for  wrath  to 
him  that  doeth  evil.  Therefore,  it  is  necessary  to 
obey,  not  only  for  wrath,  but  for  conscience'  sake. 
For  this  cause  pay  you  tribute  also,  for  they  are  the 
servants  of  God,  waiting  continually  for  this  very 
thing.    Kender  therefore  to  all  their  due ;  tribute  to 


158  APPENDIX. 

\fhom  tribute;  custom  to  whom  custom,  fear  to  whom 
fear,  honour  to  whom  honour.'  Can  any  M^ords  make 
the  subject  more  plain,  that  it  is  the  appointment  of 
God,  and  the  ruler  answering  the  character  here  given 
him,  that  lays  the  obligation  upon  Christians  to  obey 
himl  If  the  people  who  bring  Romans  xiii.  1,  as  a 
proof  of  mere  passive  obedience  to  all  sorts  of  supe- 
riors, will  please  to  read  the  text  carefully,  the  argu- 
ments they  use  will  vanish,  whether  they  will  or  not. 
It  is  plain  to  a  demonstration  that  as  the  Apostle  does 
not  here  appoint  any  particular  form  of  government, 
so  he  says  nothing  of  the  present  rulers,  but  recom- 
mends subjection  to  governors  in  general;  and  that 
from  the  consideration  of  the  Divine  institution  of 
their  office,  and  the  advantage  thereof  to  mankind, 
when  right  administered.  To  resist  such  governors 
as  answer  the  end  of  their  office,  and  the  Apostle's 
representation  is,  no  doubt,  a  great  crime,  and  de- 
serves a  proportionable  punishment,  called  here 
x^tjutt  (judgment,)  both  in  this  life,  and  that  which  is 
to  come.  But  the  resisting  of  tyranny  and  tyrants 
falls  not  under  the  sentence  of  the  Apostle.  The 
text  says  nothing  to  the  case  of  tyrants,  but  really 
excludes  them  as  being  another  sort  of  creatures 
from  what  he  describes,  and  the  very  reverse  of 
that  character  which  he  gives  the  minister  of  God, 
to  whom  he  requires  subjection.'"' 

"  They  are  not  at  all  authorities  of  God,  according 
to  the  Apostle,  if  they  are  a  terror  to  good  w^orks,  and 
a  praise  to  evil  j  for  the  authorities  appointed  by  God 


APPENDIX.  159 

are  appointed  for  this  end.  And  the  authority  that 
does  not  answer  this  end  is  not  an  authority  that  it 
is  lawful  to  obey.  In  such  a  case,  the  threatening 
should  be  read  backwards,  namely,  '  he  that  resisteth 
not  the  power  shall  receive  (x§tjwa)  judgment.^  If  any 
person  were  to  read  a  Greek  classic  as  these  advo- 
cates for  passive  obedience  read  the  New  Testament, 
they  would  be  posted  up  as  enemies  to  true  litera- 
ture and  common  sense,  by  all  the  literati  in  the 
three  kingdoms.  The  Apostles  have  nowhere  af- 
firmed, that  Christians,  at  the  pleasure  of  despots, 
were  to  surrender  their  liberties  more  than  others, 
who  were  fellow-citizens  with  them,  in  the  same 
country.  If  both  the  rulers  and  the  rest  of  the  sub- 
jects difier  with  them,  they  have  no  other  shift  but  to 
remonstrate  against  their  oppression,  suffer,  or  forsake 
their  country." 

Milton  says: — 

"The  words  immediately  after  make  it  as  clear 
as  the  sun,  that  the  Apostle  speaks  oijly  of  a  lawful 
power;  for  he  gives  us  in  them  a  definition  of  ma- 
gistrates, and  thereby  explains  to  us  who  are  the 
persons  thus  authorized,  and  upon  what  account  we 
are  to  yield  obedience,  lest  we  should  be  apt  to  mis- 
take, and  ground  extravagant  notions  upon  his  dis- 
course. 'Magistrates/  says  he,  ' ai-e  not  a  terror  to 
good  works  J  hut  to  evil.  Wilt  thou,  then,  not  he  afraid  of 
the  power'?  Do  that  which  is  good,  and  thou  shall  have 
praise  of  the  same;  for  he  is  the  minister  of  God  to  thee 


160  APPENDIX. 

for  good:  he  beareth  not  the  sword  in  vain;  for  he  is  the 
minister  of  God,  a  revenger,  to  execute  wrath  upon  him 
that  doeth  eviV  What  honest  man  would  not  wil- 
lingly submit  to  such  a  magistracy  as  is  here  de- 
scribed, and  that  not  only  to  avoid  wrath,  and  for 
fear  of  punishment,  but  for  conscience'  sake  ?  What- 
ever power  enables  a  man,  or  whatsoever  magis- 
trate takes  upon  him  to  act  contrary  to  what  Paul 
makes  the  duty  of  those  that  are  in  authority,  neither 
is  that  power  nor  that  magistrate  ordained  of  God; 
and,  consequently,  to  such  a  magistrate  no  subjec- 
tion is  commanded,  nor  is  any  due ;  nor  are  the  peo- 
ple forbidden  to  resist  such  authority;  for  in  so  doing, 
they  do  not  resist  the  power  nor  the  magistracy,  as 
they  are  here  excellently  well  described;  but  they 
resist  a  robber,  a  tyrant,  an  enemy,  who,  if  he  may 
notwithstanding,  in  some  sense,  be  called  a  magis- 
trate upon  this  account  only,  because  he  has  power 
in  his  hands — by  the  same  reason,  the  d£vil  may  be 
called  a  magistrate." 

D.— Page  135. 

As  to  the  true  origin  of  the  Roman  power,  it  is 
stated  in  Rev.  xiii.  5, — "And  the  dragon  gave  him 
his  power  and  state  and  great  authority."  On  this 
Dr.  Junhin  says : 

"  Now  the  source  of  this  power  is  pointed  out.  The 
dragon  gave  it  to  him :  Diabolus  formed  this  city  and 
ofovernment  for  himself." 


APPENDIX.  161 

Dr.  Scott  says : 

-'The  dragon  may  here  mean  either  the  devil,  or 
the  devil's  vicegerent ,  the  idolatrous  Roman  Empire. — ' 
So  that  when  another  idolatrous  persecuting  power 
had  succeeded  to  that  of  the  heathen  emperors,  then 
'the  dragon^  had  transferred  his  dominion  to  'the 
beast/  or  the  devil  had  appointed  another  vicegerent. 
and  all  the  world  knows  that  this  occurred  to  the  his- 
tory of  the  Roman  Empire,  Pagan  and  Papal." 

Dr.  JunTcin  adds: 

'•The  Scripture  account  of  absolute  despotism  (he 
might  have  said  of  all  godless  and  Christless  power,) 
is,  that  Satan  gave  it,  and  the  blasphemous  slander  of 
God  is  the  argument  by  which  the  doctrine  of  legiti- 
macy is  sustained  from  the  Bible.  'Our  power  is  of 
God.'  'The  powers  that  be  are  ordained  of  God.' — - 
therefore  iron-handed  despotism  is  a  divine  institu-^ 
tion.  This  is  the  conclusion  of  its  friends,  but  the 
word  of  truth  proclaims  it  to  be  from  below.  The 
same  kind  of  logic  will  prove  the  devil's  own  usurpa- 
tions to  be  right  and  proper  .  .  .  The  fallacy  lies  here 
in  a  false  assumption.  Paul  says,  '  The  powers  that 
be,'  sxova-isti,  that  is,  civil  government,  is  an  ordinance 
of  God;  and  the  assumption  is  that  it  means  arbitrar}' 
power — might  without  right.  This  is  the  Icjic  by 
which  Diabolus  has  blasphemed  the  Creator  for  a 
score  of  centuries."  (See  Lectures  on  Revelation,  pp- 
209,  210.) 


162  APPENDIX. 

E.— Page  150. 
The  arrogance  of  the  Papists,  both  in  England  and 
in  this  country,  is  already  beginning  to  awaken  doubts 
whether  after  all  it  is  safe  to  admit  the  votaries  of  su- 
perstition, and  the  subjects  of  such  a  spiritual  despo- 
tism, to  the  full  enjoyment  of  political  rights  among 
a  Protestant  people.  God  will  yet  avenge,  and  by 
the  Papists  themselves,  as  his  instruments,  nations 
that  have  not  only  given  equal  honour  and  protection 
to  Christ's  church  and  her  anti-Christian  counterfeit, 
but  have  boasted  of  this  as  a  suitable  display  of  libe- 
rality. 

Dr.  Junldn  says : 

"The  grand  defect  in  the  bond  of  our  national 
union  is  the  absence  of  the  recognition  of  God  as  the 
Governor  of  this  world.  We  have  omitted — may  it 
not  be  said,  refused? — to  own  Him  whose  head  wears 
many  crowns,  as  having  any  right  of  dominion  over 
us.  The  constitution  of  the  United  States  contains  no 
express  recognition  of  the  being  of  a  God;  much  less 
an  acknowledgment  that  The  Word  of  God  sways  the 
sceptre  of  universal  dominion.  This  is  our  grand 
national  sin  of  omission.  This  gives  the  infidel  oc- 
casion to  glory,  and  has  no  small  influence  in  fos- 
tering infidelity  in  affairs  of  state,  and  among  politi- 
cal men.  That  the  nation  will  be  blessed  with  peace 
and  prosperity  continuously,  until  this  defect  be  reme- 
died, no  Christian  philosopher  expects.  For  this  na- 
tional insult,  the  Governor  of  the  universe  will  litt 
again  and  again  his  rod  of  iron  over  our  heads,  until 
we  be  affrighted,  and  give  this  glory  to  his  name. — 
(Lectures  on  Revelation,  pp.  280-1.) 


DATE  DUE 

HIGHSMITH#45115 

